A response to young Lisa's bitching.

I don't know how to link directly to a post on that stupid blog setup she has... but it's posted at 12:14am, Sunday July 31st 2005. Bitching about Gay Marriage and religion bashing etc.

From Lisa's blog:

I'm tired, so this is bound to be more or less incoherent. And probably what some might deem "unintelligent". And full of spelling mistakes! Our friend Phreadom can enjoy them.

I read a stupid article in our lovely left-leaning newspaper, The Sun. Shouldn't have done it - I knew it would make me mad.

The stupid thing was so biased, and so wrong. Good Lord - why can't people just believe whatever the hell they want to believe, and not bug other people about it? Let me say this. JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE RELIGIOUS DOESN'T MEAN THEY CAN'T VOICE THEIR OPINIONS. For goodness sakes - the whole point of government is so that people of varying opinions and beliefs can be represented, not just one group of similar minded people. Everyone has opinions, and everyone deserves a say. Christians aren't going to take over the world, for goodness sakes. Stand up for what you believe in - unless it's politically incorrect. Then you're a bigoted, hateful, prejudicial person and you don't deserve a say. Arg.

Oh yes. And 75% of Canadians believe in defending the traditional definition of marriage. And so our government passes the law! Whoo! Way to be a representation of the people! Bastards.

And they also bashed a whole bunch of Christian orginizations. Why don't we abolish all of those too? Religious people shouldn't be allowed to be religious in public. Or teach what they believe, or what the Bible says. Heaven forbid.

And this is NOT an oppertunity for people to start an angry argument over the comments. I'm looking at YOU. No insults, no anything if it's going to start a fight.

End of angry rant. Tomorrow I talk about Doug.

And here is my response, as I'd like people to see it here as well, even if they don't read Lisa's blog, as it covers what I feel is an important topic, and I need to update the status of the about.com article anyway.

We're as free to call Christians (and other religious folks) idiots as they are to open their mouths and prove it.

It goes both ways. I actually support freedom of religion. I also support freedom of speech and separation of church and state. Just because you're free to believe in an imaginary sky god, doesn't give you the right to legislate your dogma based morals onto me, or force me to acknowledge your imaginary god by making it a part of my government and pledge of allegiance etc.

If you had actually read my blog, maybe you'd understand the finer points of the distinction, where I even posted an excellent article by a CHRISTIAN AUTHOR extolling the virtues of separation of church and state and common sense etc. Very well put.

Actually, I believe I'll dig it up again and post it here for you to refresh yourself. :)

And for the record, I agree with anonymous. It was the right thing to do. That much should have been obvious. But generally Christians have a hard time accepting that not everyone believes that Christians have the right to make their personal and/or religious beliefs into law to control the lives of other people. The law isn't meant to prevent things you simply don't agree with, and you saying "well god says so" is definitely not a valid argument in a court of law. Sorry.

---------

And having gone to find that article, I see that about.com has removed it, and moved all discussion of Separation of Church and State out of the Christianity section into the Agnosticism/Atheism section. Which raises an eyebrow in and of itself to say the least, considering that being for Separation of Church and State IN NO WAY makes you an Atheist or Agnostic. That's just what the Christians would like to have you believe.

You can find the original article archived here on Archive.org.

Written by a Christian author, Charles Henderson, entitled "Separation of Church and State - A Wall That Should Not Fall".

PLEASE READ IT. You should be able to figure out exactly why Separation of Church and State is a good thing, and why it's not an attack on religion. They are 2 separate things, and coming from myself, who loves to bash religious folk as they idiots they are, also firmly believes in their right to believe that. Sorry if that's hard for you to understand. It's a little thing called common sense and freedom. Just because you aren't gay, doesn't mean you have the right to legislate your morality or beliefs onto another person and tell them they can't be normal like you just because they're attracted to another person of the same sex in the same way you're attracted to a person of the opposite sex. I believe I made this very clear on my blog with PLENTY of links to relevant material, just for people like you.

Just another reason I hate Religion.

There you go Lisa, just for you.

Please, do us all a favor and read those before you either bitch anymore, or before you bitch at me for posting to correct you.

Thanks.

(I would think it would be the least you could do, considering how much work I put into that post on Homosexuality just because I knew that I'd need the relevant information to convince people like you, so I spent quite awhile one day repeatedly revising, expanding and correcting that post to make it more informative.)

Enjoy.

I might just post a copy of Charles Hendersons article as well, as it's no longer available on-line, but I think I'd need to get his permission to do so... and I'm not sure how fond he'd be of that, considering my general Christian-bashing nature, even though he and I are in total agreement on the article itself.

Just when you think you've seen everything...

ANN COULTER
(... a message of hate & intolerance.)

Ann Coulter on Wikiquote.

Ann Coulter on dKosopedia.

Ann Coulter on Wikipedia.

And just for a taste:

Finally, many critics oppose Coulter's support for Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, President Richard Nixon, and Senator Joseph McCarthy and many of her stated views, such as:

* Women should not be allowed to vote.
* Women have no capacity to understand how money is earned.
* Women should not be allowed in the military.
* Juvenile delinquents should be publically flogged.
* Liberals should be threatened with death or they will become traitors.
* Environmentalism is against God's wish that we "rape" the Earth.
* The way to prevent school shootings is to allow students to carry guns.
* Canada is lucky that we allow them to exist on the same continent.
* Muslims smell bad and we should forcibly convert them to Christianity.
* The New York Times building should be blown up with the editors and reporters inside.
* Fascism on a local level can be beneficial.

And for more of the same kind of ludicrous idiocy, ThoseShirts.com

I've run across a few other sites, like Life, Liberty, Etc. which I don't wholly disagree with. While I do agree with a lot of the concepts they claim to promote, I simply find that their pride in ignorance, intolerance, hate and destroying the planet while happily murdering any non-Christian-Republican-Americans in the process, to be appalling.

Ann Coulter shirt.
Axis of Evil shirt.
Kick their ass, Take their gas.
Fun facts about the French.
Fun facts about Liberals.

I honestly wasn't sure if this site was serious at first... I mean some of this shit is so far beyond ridiculous that it just couldn't be serious... but, no, it is.

<sarcasm>I love being ridiculed for actually being educated. LOVE IT.</sarcasm>

Something about someone arguing that being intelligent and having an education as being an insult they'll use against you... it really says something about the person that would hold that view. ;-)

Fun with blogs. :-)

Well, today I made a new header graphic for Lisa's blog... I'm glad she likes it. :D I think it turned out well.

I also added some silly blog stat things to my side bar. A "NeoCounter" and a thing for the "The Truth Laid Bear Ecosystem".

Creationists, ID'ers, Young Earthers...

One name... Kent Hovind.

Pleasant to see that this "Creation Science Evangelist" is so full of bullshit that even reputable christian organizations are distancing themselves from him and going as far as to flat out state point by point how wrong he is.

Now, I'm no fan of christians and generally think they're all fucking idiots... but these guys in AiG are definitely a cut above the norm. They definitely talk the talk, and to have the common sense to say everything they've said on that page so far, they've really got my attention.

Christianity has HAD to come to the realization that evolution is a FACT. That the age of the earth and of the dinosaurs are FACTS. Creationism in the sense of god creating the universe or of god guiding evolution... these things aren't really in debate... god creating everything we see today a few thousand years ago just as it is now, like the bible says... BULLSHIT. and even most knowledgeable christians know it's BULLSHIT... even though they're still not bright enough to stop following the book that swears that bullshit as fact... or the stupid religion based on that fallacious bullshit... but babysteps I guess. we're headed in the right direction.

(I was going to debunk his video point by point, but the net is full of sites that do it already... and with the rate the guy lied at... I would have had pages and pages of work for only the first 4 minutes of the film. it's insane.)

All the small things.

I decided to venture outdoors today. I spent around an hour walking around on the hill behind the house... I followed a mysterious wire down from the hill, all through the Blackberry bushes, around and around, then back up the hill, then back down again but lost it when it got too thick and I got distracted gorging myself on Blackberries.

While outside, I noticed the leg of a Stag Beetle laying by the steps... I picked it up and was admiring it... pondering the form and function of it... which also reminded me of whale flippers and how they're pushing the envelope of airplane design because of the scalloped edges which reduce drag. (see this article, down the page a bit where it shows the picture of a scalloped and smooth flipper)

I decided to see if I could get a picture of the leg to put on here... surprisingly my crappy old webcam can focus in pretty close. :-D So I took a few pics with that... adjusting the light etc. I then decided to see if I couldn't find other things to take pictures of.

So I wandered around for awhile... took a picture of a Clover blossom that was growing by my car. Then I wandered into the trees, and underneath a pine tree, near a dead rabbit, I found 2 of the wings from a Moth. It looks like he/she probably ended up as a meal for a hungry bird. Near that, I found the molted exoskeleton of a Cicada. I used to wander around my grandfathers property as a child looking for these on the trees. I also found a wing that appears to be from a freshly molted Cicada, so I'm guessing he ended up as a snack as well. :-( Not a lucky tree for the little critters I guess.

Anyway... it was nice to get outside and enjoy nature for awhile and to focus on the little things in life that make life so interesting. Sometimes it's easy to overlook the wonderful things right there at your feet.

(I know the Cicada exoskeleton might look pretty dirty and scary, but it's because they spend their adolescence underground for generally 2 to 5 years, up to sometimes 17 years before they burrow up and out and climb a tree to molt their exoskeletons and become winged adults. They feed on the juice from roots etc... from 1 foot to almost 9 feet underground. So the exoskeleton I found is understandably grubby and eerie looking... form follows function etc.)

Just another reason I hate Religion.

'Ex-Gay' Camps, Therapy Programs Attract Controversy.

The American Psychological Association says there are a number of theories about the origins of a person's sexual orientation, but that most scientists agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors. The APA says homosexuality is not a choice and that in most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age.

"A lot of harm is done by these programs," said Dr. Jack Dreshcer of the American Psychological Association. "It creates shame and guilt feelings that can lead to suicidal behavior."

Love in Action was the center of an investigation by the Tennessee Department of Mental Health for touting its program as therapy but not servicing the facility with licensed mental health professionals. Since then Love in Action has changed the wording on their Web site. Prior to this, the program was cleared of abuse allegations by the Tennessee Department of Children Services.

Yes, better to have people who don't actually understand actual reality and science behind human sexuality, and take their knowledge from a millenia old book that advocates killing rape victims or forcing them to marry their assailants, or stoning your own children to death, or sacrificing them to your imaginary god... that doesn't even understand human anatomy etc etc... yes, let's believe those people and let's trust unlicensed and untrained people to brainwash otherwise perfectly healthy children into hating themselves and driving them to suicidal behavior for feeling that what they feel naturally is "a sin"... that they are simply choosing this "wrong" behavior etc. Let's just push our archaic and narrow minded bigoted morality down everyone else's throat.

The American Psychological Association says homosexuality is not a choice and that in most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age.

Maybe we should send all the Christians to gay camps and force them to see how it feels to be told that your sexuality is just a choice and that you are a confused person making a depraved and immoral choice that you have to change... and bring in god and eternal salvation and other fantasies into it to deepen the psychological effects etc.

GRRRR.

And just to clarify, this isn't just a Christian thing...

Go read up on Homosexuality please. Try actually educating yourselves and not maintaining your ignorance while you screw up people who aren't what you wish they were, in part because you simply don't know any better.

Iranian youths Mahmoud Asgari and Ayaz Marhoni on the scaffold. (Mashhad, July 19, 2005). At the ages of, respectively, 15 and 17 they had been discovered having sexual relations. They were imprisoned for fourteen months and sentenced to 228 lashes each, followed by death by hanging. (read the full story here)

An estimated 700,000 participants (AFP) march through Paris, France, chanting "Marriage, Adoption, and Equality" during 2005 Gay Pride festivities.

Make sure you actually read the story behind that first picture. It paints a very clear picture of the result of bigoted religious mindsets. This is something that we as a Humans should be progressing away from, not regressing into or perpetuating. It is fairly easy to see with a little research how the advancement of science, literacy and free thought has dramatically increased the understanding and acceptance of Homosexuality throughout the world. It's just sad that we obviously have so far to go... and it only increases my animosity towards the abject willful ignorance of religion that it is such a strong promoter of this primitive mindset and behavior.

Religious Beliefs Underpin Opposition to Homosexuality. (download the full report as a .pdf with demographic information etc.)

It's sad that both those activities can be taking place in the world at the same time. What crime are people committing who love each other as adults, or even as teenagers? Who are NOT making a CHOICE to be that way, but following their feelings, NO DIFFERENTLY than a heterosexual person would feel for a person of the opposite sex. They are doing nothing wrong except not living by the moral standards preached by a particular religion, or not living like someone who doesn't feel the same would want them to.

It almost makes me cry that people can be so bigoted.

big·ot
n.
   One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Their only arguments are "It's not natural.", which has been proven to be false. It is, by definition, natural, which they would know if they actually STUDIED for a change and didn't make baseless statements based on their willful ignorance. Hard to argue a point when you've bothered to study and find out that you're completely wrong.

nat·u·ral
adj.
   1. Present in or produced by nature.

(And along with that definition, an article covering many aspects of Non-Human and animal sexuality, including Homosexuality.)

Or they argue that God says it's a sin. Also hard to argue when you realize that your imaginary god is a fantasy and that not all people believe in your imaginary sky god, or in any god for that matter... or that even if they do, that they believe that god would have any reason to hate them for being as he made them to be.

How tiny your minds are about the world you live in.

A closing note from the conversation I'm having with Jen after writing this:

phreadom: I had to go through this with my own parents, who said to me "we're praying for you because we feel you're going down paths god didn't intend."
phreadom: I know for a fact that if I had been gay, my parents would be far worse than they are now. They have stated flat out that homosexuality is a sin and an abomination in gods eyes, and that gays are going to burn in hell.

So you can probably see why this is a touchy subject with me. My mother has flat out stated that she is right because the bible says so, and that because God says so, she has the right to legislate HER ideas of what morality should be, onto other people. To be able to make it illegal for people to have any sexual behavior outside of what her and the bible deem appropriate. Centuries of scientific and psychological study and advancement be damned! Post Kinsey breakthroughs into the understanding of human sexuality? PSHAW!! We have a millenia old book to tell us how to live!

*shakes head sadly*

Once more, in closing... from the Wikipedia entry on Sexual Orientation:

Clinically, heterosexuality is considered typical (statistically most likely), but the concept of "normal" and "abnormal" with its connotations of sickness or moral judgment are no longer considered valid by most medical professionals. In 1998, the American Psychological Association stated, "the reality is that homosexuality is not an illness. It does not require treatment and is not changeable."

News from the other side of the Pond.

U.S. taxpayer footing Israel’s Gaza withdrawal bill.

In addition to the U.S. annual $3 billion aid to Israel, Tel Aviv has asked Washington to “pay” it some $2.2 billion for the withdrawal of illegal settlers currently residing in the occupied Palestinian territory of the Gaza Strip.

Is lying about war an impeachable offense?

This article is full of rather scathing statements, many are direct quotes from Bush and company about justifications for the war that were later proved false etc. Just read it, as it would be silly to copy and paste half of the article here.

The U.S. President George W. Bush is facing a very serious problem. Before seeking approval from the Congress to use military action against Iraq, he made a number of unequivocal statements about the reasons the U.S. needed to topple Saddam Hussein.

Iraq, Afghan wars exceed $700 billion in costs.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have burdened the U.S. taxpayers with enormous debt critics say already costing some $314 billion, and the Congressional Budget Office projects additional expenses over the next ten years could be in the tune of $450 billion.

This is the type of stuff that angers me so much when people like my parents pursue ignorance and then try to avoid responsibility for ignoring the warnings of people like myself who have done more research than they have... ignore responsibility for supporting a president and administration that has crippled this nation domestically and internationally. Saddled us with incredibly huge debts that will fall upon the shoulders of their children, annihilated our international image and made us the target of worldwide hatred and fear to an unprecedented level, singlehandedly caused a massive increase in terrorist action, terrorist recruitment and instability in the middle east. Not to mention the unnecessary deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.

"Bush is against abortion. And that's reason enough to stand behind him and not John Kerry."

Nice trade. Thanks Mom and Dad. You've really made the world a better place.

"Pandering Bullshit ©"

From the CNN Article "2 bomb suspects African immigrants":

Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Tony Blair met opposition party leaders Tuesday to discuss new legislation aimed at preventing a repeat of July 7 bombings.

The legislation would outlaw "indirect incitement" of terrorism, including praising those who carry out attacks, to counter extremist Islamist clerics accused of radicalizing disaffected Muslim youth in Britain.

The law also would make it illegal to receive training in terrorist techniques in Britain or abroad, or to plan an attack and activities such as acquiring bomb-making instructions on the Internet.

After the talks, Michael Howard, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, insisted Britain's main political parties were united in their determination to tackle terrorism.

*ahem* As yath so eloquently stated; "<yath> That sounds like so much pandering bullshit."

pan·der
intr.v. pan·dered, pan·der·ing, pan·ders
   1. To act as a go-between or liaison in sexual intrigues; function as a procurer.
   2. To cater to the lower tastes and desires of others or exploit their weaknesses: “He refused to pander to nostalgia and escapism” (New York Times).

Yes, let's put further restrictions on speech and thought rather than actually adress the actual causes of "terrorism". Let's take steps in the wrong direction because the ignorant sheep will gladly trade freedom for the illusion of safety.

Please make sure you've read my previous post on Mayor Livingstone to see a politician who is actually addressing the actual causes of "terrorism" and making an attempt to approach this problem from an educated, realistic angle rather than one of, as yath said, pandering bullshit to peddle illusions safety to ignorant sheep while making the situation increasingly worse and while also stripping away ever increasing amounts of civil liberties and freedom and putting more power in the hands of the government.

Now, I hate to bring up this quote, because it's not actually by Caesar... but sometimes these quotes still have interesting merit on their own, regardless of authorship. So I'll just include here the relevant part of the quote:

Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.

Think about it.

The Gradual Illumination of the Mind.

The Gradual Illumination of the Mind.
Michael Shermer, Scientific American, February 2002 issue.

In one of the most existentially penetrating statements ever made by a scientist, Richard Dawkins concluded that "the universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference."

Facing such a reality, perhaps we should not be surprised at the results of a 2001 Gallup poll confirming that 45 percent of Americans believe "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so"; 37 percent prefer a blended belief that "human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process"; and a paltry 12 percent accept the standard scientific theory that "human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process."

In a forced binary choice between the "theory of creationism" and the "theory of evolution," 57 percent chose creationism against only 33 percent for evolution (10 percent said that they were "unsure"). One explanation for these findings can be seen in additional results showing that just 34 percent considered themselves to be "very informed" about evolution.

Although such findings are disturbing, truth in science is not determined democratically. It does not matter what percentage of the public believes a theory. It must stand or fall on the evidence, and there are few theories in science that are more robust than the theory of evolution. The preponderance of evidence from numerous converging lines of inquiry (geology, paleontology, zoology, botany, comparative anatomy, genetics, biogeography, and so on) points to the same conclusion--evolution is real. The 19th-century philosopher of science William Whewell called this process of independent lines of inquiry converging together to a conclusion a "consilience of inductions." I call it a "convergence of evidence." Whatever you call it, it is how historical events are proved.

The reason we are experiencing this peculiarly American phenomenon of evolution denial (the doppelgänger of Holocaust denial, using the same techniques of rhetoric and debate) is that a small but vocal minority of religious fundamentalists misread the theory of evolution as a challenge to their deeply held religious convictions. Given this misunderstanding, their response is to attack the theory. It is no coincidence that most evolution deniers are Christians who believe that if God did not personally create life, then they have no basis for belief, morality and the meaning of life. Clearly for some, much is at stake in the findings of science.

Because the Constitution prohibits public schools from promoting any brand of religion, this has led to the oxymoronic movement known as "creation science" or, in its more recent incarnation, "intelligent design" (ID). ID (aka God) miraculously intervenes just in the places where science has yet to offer a comprehensive explanation for a particular phenomenon. (ID used to control the weather, but now that we understand it, He has moved on to more difficult problems, such as the origins of DNA and cellular life. Once these problems are mastered, then ID will no doubt find even more intractable conundrums.) Thus, IDers would have us teach children nonthreatening theories of science, but when it comes to the origins of life and certain aspects of evolution, children are to learn that "ID did it." I fail to see how this is science--or what, exactly, ID-ers hope will be taught in these public schools. "ID did it" makes for a rather short semester.

To counter the nefarious influence of the ID creationists, we need to employ a proactive strategy of science education and evolution explanation. It is not enough to argue that creationism is wrong; we must also show that evolution is right. The theory's founder, Charles Darwin, knew this when he reflected: "It appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments against Christianity and theism produce hardly any effect on the public; and freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men's minds which follows from the advance of science."

Michael Shermer [the author] is founding publisher of Skeptic magazine and author of The Borderlands of Science.

Great discussion on slashdot again.

Butterfly Unlocks Evolution Secret. [slashdot article with comments about the BBC NEWS article]

Butterfly unlocks evolution secret. [original article on BBC NEWS]

The ensuing discussion/debate on slashdot has a lot of the sillier religious ideas being shaken around like babies.

(cue the groans here)

;P Anyway, seriously... many of the common defenses that religious and "Intelligent Design" people etc like to use, get smacked down and a lot of other interesting things explained.

Here are a few samples:

Re:Intelligent Design, explained Intelligently (Score:5, Insightful)
by ajs318 (655362) <sd_resp2.earthshod@co@uk> on Monday July 25, @07:14AM (#13154878)

Science starts from the standpoint that everything that can be observed can be explained. Religion starts from the standpoint that some things cannot be explained. The two are reconcilable only to the extent that ideas can be accepted without need of explanation -- in other words, Not Very Far At All.

The problem I have with the idea of "intelligent design" is that it breaks several important rules, not the least of which is the KISS principle. The need for an Intelligent Designer rests on the notion of Irreducible Complexity. But there is no irreducible complexity in nature. On the contrary, an Intelligent Designer would introduce irreducible complexity.

The Universe embodies the principle that simplicity is beauty. {Why does the pressure in a fluid act equally in all directions? Because it was simpler than favouring a particular direction. Why does light travel in straight lines? Because it was simpler that way. Why do men have nipples? Because it was too complicated for them not to.} If we take that logic to the extreme, it is simpler for the universe to have created itself somehow {and here I am making no assumptions about the process by which this might happen}, than for a creator to have been created as an intermediate step. My assertion is: There is no process that could have created a creator, that could not instead -- and more simply -- have created a fully-formed universe.

{The predominance of D- over L- enantiomers in nature is not evidence for Intelligent Design. It can be shown by analysis of potential reaction mechanisms that right-handed would favour right-handed and vice versa. It is probable that the primordial soup was close to racemic, but somehow more D- than L- proto-organisms survived and eventually L- forms became extinct. It ought to be possible to synthesise and culture the opposite enantiomer of an existing DNA sample, resulting in a "left handed clone". Pending the perfection of the necessary equipment, this must be left as an exercise for the reader :) It is of course possible that life on other planets could be wholly or predominantly left-handed.}

The argument against life being created by random chance ignores the obvious fact that the improbable event has already happened. In fact, given the sheer magnitude of the universe, it was close to inevitable that life would develop somewhere. Remember that the many necessary attempts were taking place in parallel, not in series {if you throw six dice at a time, the odds favour at least one of them being a six}. And not everything in the process is truly random: certain chemical elements are predisposed to bond in certain ways.

Remember also that radioactive decay events, which we know today trigger genetic mutation, would have been more common the further back in time we travel. We cannot know for certain {though we might infer from decay products} whether or not some especially radioactive isotope existed in the past but has become completely exhausted today.

{I realise that there are quite a few dangling "somehows" in this essay. It is not my intension to offer explanations for them here. These are "closing" rather than "opening" questions, which is to say that the answers will not in and of themselves raise further questions.}

and

Re:Stop a moment and observe.. (Score:5, Insightful)
by Shaper_pmp (825142) on Monday July 25, @09:12AM (#13155408)

"What are the chances for life to live on this earth? If it were too cool, or too warm, all species would be extinct. A little closer- or farther from the sun, *poof*. A little more of this gas, or that, or different weights in the forces."

Logical fallacy.

If conditions were even slightly different at any point in the history of the universe, all current species would be extinct. You can't say our current ecosystem contains all possible species for every possible set of environmental conditions and physical laws, so you can't say that no life would exist, merely that our current form(s) of life wouldn't.

We evolved in these conditions - it's no surprise that we're extraordinarily tightly bound to them. You're confusing cause and effect.

For another example, riffle through a pack of cards and pick one. Put it back and do it again. You pick the four of clubs, followed by the ace of hearts. So what?

So what? At this point, the four of clubs is looking around and thinking "Wow, what are the odds, eh? The chances of me and Ace here existing are 1 in two thousand and four!. Yeah, but the chance of "two cards being picked" is pretty much 1:1 (leaving aside the possibilities of spontaneous combustion or weird quantum tunneling effects half-way through ;-)

You're looking around, assuming this is the only way "life" could possibly ever evolve, and positing the fluke was down to an intelligent creator.

First off, we still don't have a complete understanding of what even constitutes "life", so you can't claim a definite conclusion of any kind. All you can do is construct theories, using rational, logical inference and falsifiable hypotheses.

Secondly, it could well be that "life" is merely an emergent property of a sufficiently complex organisation of matter left for a long enough time, in which case the chances of life appearing in the universe would be about 1:1.

Short answer: Science teaches us to adopt the leading falsifiable hypothesis only until a better one comes along. In other words, keep investigating, and don't ever assume you know the complete answer.

Religion teaches us unsubstantiated irrational heresay from thousands of years before the scientific method, and expects us to treat it as the final answer. In other words, shut up, sit down and stop asking awkward questions.

"I just know that there is a Big Mind behind it all."

No, you think there's a Big Mind behind it all. This is the central point of ID/creationism/religious zealotry of all types - a complete inability to differentiate between "know", "believe, based on the preponderance of evidence" and "believe, with no evidence whatsoever to support your conclusion".

I have no problem with someone believing whatever they like - it's when they mistake that for "knowing" and attempt to force their own irrational beliefs on others that I feel compelled to stand up.

"Then what's the point arguing about it? Like ants arguing about the demi-god roaming around the garden making large craters.."

Amen to that - it's essentially unknowable, so it's not science, but philosophy. If Creationists/ID-proponents wanted religion discussed in Philosophy I'd have no problem.

and

Re:Those who don't learn from history... (Score:5, Insightful)

by mrchaotica (681592) <mrchaotica@ya[ ].com ['hoo' in gap]> on Sunday July 24, @09:32PM (#13153003)

The article referred to here is typical: we believe that speciation drives evolution, have done so since we believed that those incredibly intricate sets of interwoven biological factories called cells were just little bags of slime. Just now, after more than a century of holding this as nothing less than an article of faith, we think we might be seeing it happening. Maybe.

There's a key point here that you're missing: When a scientist says "believe" he means something different than when a creationist says it. For a creationist, "believe" means "I have faith that this is so, not because of any empirical evidence, but because it's what I've been told by 'good people' who assure me they're telling the Truth."

On the other hand, for a scientist "believe" means "I think that this is true because it's a logical conclusion drawn from occurances which I or someone else have directly observed. Additionally, if presented with compelling evidence (i.e. direct observation) that refutes this conclusion, I will cease to believe it."

That's the key here: evolution is the best explanation (so far) for what we observe without relying on "because somebody said so." That's why it's a theory: It's a conjecture derived from observable facts through logic. Moreover, this also explains why creationism isn't a theory: it relys on assumptions that cannot be derived from observable facts (at least, so far).

And you know what? Each time something like that is noticed, it's written off with a statement along the lines of "we'll eventually find a way of explaining this with evolution, never you mind". That statement is an act of faith. "There's no evidence for it here, but I believe in evolution, brother, how about you?"

If you apply what I said about scientists' use of "believe" you should now understand why this isn't the "act of faith" you think it is. The scientists aren't saying they disregard the facts in front of them; they're saying that those facts aren't enough to disprove evolution and that they also don't have any scientific explanation that fits the facts better than evolution. Creationism is right out from the beginning because, as I've said already, it isn't a rigorous, logically-deduced argument to begin with.

If you can think of an explanation that fits all observed facts better than evolution and doesn't rely on Faith, then you can start complaining about some kind of conspiracy among scientists to reject anything that's not evolution.

This is a tiny fraction of all the discussion on the website, and it's really worth reading. A lot of the threads were very interesting, but I could only really post the single coherent posts here for the sake of readability and space. The threads are very interesting in themselves because of the way the ideas flow through the different peoples views and responses.

------------

I noticed that reading the third post above, that they were covering a topic that I have covered more than once in the past. Here is one, and I just noticed that unfortunately, while you can read my summary of my feelings on the subject... the stupid cowardly bitch whose blog is referenced, removed all the comments of the lengthy, heated, in-depth debate that we had, so you can't actually see the original. I FUCKING HATE people that do that. "Let's just hide reality to preserve just our ignorant fairytale view." (Although, to be fair, it looks as though a lot of comments are gone, and not just from that post. It's possible that she just hid most comments in general on some a number of posts for another reason. They're not completely disabled obviously, as many other posts still have plenty of comments.)

What's humorous is that I actually got verbally schooled by Ian during that debate, as his vocabulary and eloquence far outranks my own. And sadly enough, now you can't get to see me get made to look like a blubbering retard grammatically because this stupid whore wanted to hide the fact that I mentally bitch slapped her stupid friend into submission, and then her as well for having the nerve to try to send one of her friends after me when she realized that she was out of her league with me.

Oh well, here is the orignal post that sparked the aforementioned secondary post and debate on Phoenix's blog. This has the actual debates between Carlo and I from the looks of it, as well as some others with Lisa and Coyote Dude etc.

oh for the love of god...

Sisters injured in London attacks not deterred.

Both said they've yet to awaken with self-pity or hatred for the attackers. They see their wounds as "souvenirs" and believe the experience has only served to strengthen their Christian faith and their appreciation for what they have.

"There's no better way to fight terrorism than to turn what they meant for evil into good and the Lord is certainly capable of that," Katie Benton said.

Emily Benton said she expects questions of "why" will come eventually, but for now she believes a divine plan for their lives is unfolding.

"I just feel empowered and feel like God's prepared us, both of us, our whole lives for this day," she said. "And he has given us this opportunity I think to just reach out to others and to encourage others who are sick or hurt and just to make a stand against terrorism."

What the FUCK is wrong with these people!? Oh... I know... Christianity!

Yes, your god prepared you your whole life just to be blown up in a subway car. And I'm sure he was preparing all those other people that actually died too... and their families. I'm sure his wonderful plan, because he loves you so much, was to create "terrorism" in the world by creating a bunch of stupid warmongering people in our own government and creating another religion entirely that denounces the divinity of his very own son, just to create the ideology to prompt those "terrorists" to blow you and themselves up and kill all of those other people and inflict that loss and heartache on the families of all those people. Not to mention the repression and slaughter of the hundreds of thousands.. if not millions of innocent people it took to sow the roots of hatred so deeply as to prompt believers in this other religion/ideology to give their very lives to strike back against the countries, religion/ideology and way of life that has caused their people such misery.

YOU ARE SO FUCKING INSANE.

You ignorant fucking Christians just trying to look for meaning... your deep seated need for a simple explanation... you can't even see past your own nose... you are blind to the world around you. Your imaginary God is your answer and you are so backwards and ignorant in your mind that you cannot grasp how fundamentally STUPID your painfully childish explanations to yourselves are.

THINK ABOUT IT.

*sigh*

I hate religion.

"... the experience has only served to strengthen their Christian faith ..."

Indeed.

Harry Belafonte

"I work for the United Nations. I go to places where enormous upheaval and pain and anguish exist. And a lot of it exists based upon American policy. Whom we support, whom we support as heads of state, what countries we've helped to overthrow, what leaders we've helped to diminish because they did not fit the mold we think they should fit, no matter how ill advised that thought may be."

 - Harry Belafonte interview
   on CNN Larry King Live, October 15, 2002

( I have to clarify here that this post was supposed to be just the quote at the top, but upon reading up on Harry on Wikipedia and seeing what I'll explain below, I just couldn't help but bitch about it. But I don't want an older gripe to overshadow the reason I actually made this post. So, without further ado... )

Aside from that poignant statement... there is a point about his bio on Wikipedia that bothers me as well...

Harry Belafonte (born Harold George Belafonte on March 1, 1927 in Harlem, New York, United States) is a Jamaican-American calypso musician and actor who used his fame as an entertainer in the cause of human rights.

He is perhaps best known for singing the "Banana Boat Song" with its signature lyric "Day-O". His breakthrough album Calypso (1956) was the first album to sell over 1 million copies. He was the first African-American to win an Emmy, with his first solo TV special “tonight with Belafonte”.

...

From 1935 to 1939 he lived with his mother in her homeland Jamaica.

Can you figure it out?

Both Harry and his mother were born in Jamaica from what the article says, and yet they call Harry an African-American. He's BLACK. THAT DOESN'T MEAN HE HAS A GOD DAMNED THING TO DO WITH AFRICA YOU STUPID POLITICALLY CORRECT IDIOTS.

Being black doesn't mean you're from Africa. When will people figure that out?

Only around 25% of blacks in the United States can meaningfully call themselves African-Americans. Beyond that, it's about as stupid as me calling myself a European-American because if I go back several generations, I can trace my ancestry back to the old world. Hell, if I go back far enough, even I can call myself an African-American. Essentially EVERYONE ON EARTH can call themselves African-whatever, because all of humanity originated in Africa.

*sigh*

:-D

House votes to extend Patriot Act.

Democrats voice civil liberties concerns

WONDERFUL! FABULOUS! :-D

I'll be right back, I need to get a towel to clean up my sarcasm.

Britons ask "why has the Iraq war not made us safer?"

The Britons ask "why Iraq war has not made us safer?".

An excerpt from the summary:

The bombings occurred, according to Tariq Ali, "without any doubt because Tony Blair decided to lock himself in a coital embrace with the U.S. president, from which he could not be easily dislodged. He decided to take a skeptical public into a war it did not support."

Every day that British troops stay in Iraq, the more that the people of Britain are taken to be implicated in a murderous occupation. By associating Britain with the U.S. puppet regime in Iraq, whose police locked ten men in a truck to boil to death last week, Blair increases the threat to everyone who lives there.

There must be a dramatic reverse in policy, in Britain, the United States, and abroad. Pulling the troops out of Iraq will begin to drain the swamp of bitterness that nurtures “terrorism”. The threat of “terrorism” will not end overnight, but it is the absolute necessary first step. The majority of people in the United States have turned against the Bush war - Britons must intensify the pressure on their government to break from him as well.

(I had to alter the subject on my post because the translation on the title of the AlJazeera post was grammatically painful to me. I'm guessing you can see that for yourself.)

now -there- is a stupid politician.

Muslims denounce congressman's statement.

While I certainly feel that religion is the root of the problem here... his statement is entirely invalid... it would be more correct to say that we should nuke ALL religious sites, because Christian and Jewish idiocy are just as much at fault for this mess. Don't start selectively blaming one religion for a mess that is the fault of all the Abrahamic religions, and targeting just it's particular holy sites and thereby enraging all of it's followers to join a war en masse for what is at that point, a much more obvious and valid reason.

I hate relgion with a passion, but even I am not stupid enough to advocate something as ridiculous as this retard... that's like deciding to go around blowing up every major religious center and church I can find in retaliation for what Eric Rudolph did.

Which reminds me... my mother was ignorant enough to state that all terrorist attacks have been perpetrated by muslims. *sigh*

Anyway... religion is the problem here. The very root of the problem. We need to teach people to THINK... not to believe in fairytales to the exclusion of rational thought. When you ingrain such backwards thinking into your children, how can you expect them to understand the complexities of the real world? When you childishly label everything in the extremely naive and ignorant black and white labels of "Good" and "Evil", how can you expect people to have any understanding of things? To be able to solve any problem save through forceful eradication of "Evil"?

This kind of pervasive ignorance is the very root of the kind of ingorant intolerance that leads people to follow Bush into a war where THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of people are being brutally killed... that prevents them from realizing the discrepencies between reality and what is told to them. Their naive and unquestioning loyalty to figures of authority. And when reality slaps them in the face, AGAIN their religious mindset coupled with cognitive dissonace and confirmation bias causes them to again shirk off the discomfort of having to realize the consequences of their choices and beliefs.

Plainly put:

You chose to be willfully ignorant of international and domestic affairs. You chose not to do the research I have. You chose to ignore all my talks and warnings. You chose to stand absolutely steadfastly behind a candidate who shares your weaknesses and ignorance because he reminded you of yourselves. That man then did exactly what those of us who knew better told you he would... tens of THOUSANDS of innocent people have been killed as a result and the killing isn't stopping... and this is the direct result of your willfully ignorant poor choices. YOU made the choice to ignore the facts, to NOT have to critically think about the big picture. YOU stood behind that candidate and YOU SHARE THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE DEATHS OF EVERY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.

(as you yourselves said "Ignorance is bliss, and we just want to be happy.")

For YEARS now, you keep having to admit that I've been right OVER and OVER and OVER, but you never admit it until after the fact! And even when you admit it, and resent me for it... YOU STILL REFUSE TO LISTEN TO WHAT I'M SAYING. No matter how much I prove myself right, no matter how much solid evidence and REALITY backs me up, if it interferes with your FANTASY, you steadfastly IGNORE it.

God said that the world was created in 7 days, sheep and cows and birds were the very first animals, and man was created from mud and breath, and a woman from his rib, and that the sun and the stars were created on different "days", and the heavens were a mechanical dome, and plants were created before there was sunlight to feed their photosynthesis... and even though essentially EVERY SINGLE REPUTABLE SCIENTIST ON EARTH knows these things to be FALSE... you insist that because your MILLENIA old book written by primitive people who didn't know better, IS ABSOLUTELY 100% CORRECT, and every Nobel Scientist on EARTH with over 2,000 years of scientific research, discovery, testing and advancement, is ABSOLUTELY 100% WRONG. And you're 100% sure of this.

and you wonder why people like me laugh at you?

Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. [...] In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.

- Stephen J. Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981

and for good measure, to wrap this up as I realize I'm digressing enormously...



I need to take some time to cool off. This bullshit has me fuming.

more Plame, more bombs and some other world events to be aware of.

Ex-officers: CIA leak may have harmed U.S.

"Intelligence officers should not be used as political footballs," the 11 said. "In the case of Valerie Plame, she still works for the CIA and is not in a position to publicly defend her reputation and honor."

More blasts hit London transport.

Four "explosions or attempts at explosions", smaller than last time, no fatalities, one casualty.

Will media coverage victimize Israeli settlers?

"Our discourse should be focused on dealing with a number of issues that reflect the fact that the Palestinians have suffered for decades under occupation and that they are the real victims not the settlers who are the aggressors and the occupiers and not refugees or homeless.” Awkal said.

The Rove case - Bush says one thing does another.

Even staunch Republicans see through the Rove cover-up: 71 percent of Republicans in an ABC News national poll this week believe Rove should be fired for being the leaker (83 percent of Democrats) while only 25 percent of the public believe President Bush is cooperating with the investigation into the leak of Valerie Plame's name.

oh hell yeah! you go Livingstone! you go!!

London mayor: West fueled terror

Ok... now a few opinions.

First, I think that what Livingstone said was absolutely incredible. He actually said what no other first world politician has had the balls to say, IF they even realize it. Second, the fact that blair couldn't really diss the guy, but says that they fundamentally disagree. OBVIOUSLY. One of you wants to actually end terrorism... the other wants to be in bed with the US, slaughtering innocent Arabs and getting your hands on the oil supply. Gee... which is which?

In a briefing before parliament, Home Secretary Charles Clarke outlined three new criminal offenses at the heart of the government's proposals.

One provision would make the indirect incitement of terrorism an offense, a measure intended to silence radical clerics who have praised terrorist attacks.

Another proposed offense would be acts considered preparatory to terrorism. That would enable security authorities to intervene at an earlier stage to protect the public.

A third would apply a broader definition applied to the giving and receiving of terrorist training.

that part bothers me... those kind of laws are totally heading down a very dark and bad road. They are ALWAYS used in ways in which they're not supposed to be... "you're reading a book you shouldn't be. TERRORIST!"

Also:

British Muslim leaders said on Wednesday they had called for an independent judicial inquiry into what motivated the London bombings during their talks with Blair at Downing Street.

"The scale of disenchantment amongst Muslim youth is very clear to see," Inayat Bungalwala of the Muslim Council of Britain told the Associated Press.

"Various factors are at play: underachievement in education; a high rate of unemployment; discrimination in the workplace; social exclusion, and also the government's own policies, especially in Iraq.

"The process of how we get four homegrown suicide bombers must be understood and that is why we are calling for an inquiry."

LIVINGSTONE JUST POINTED YOU IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION YOU FUCKING IDIOTS. TRY PULLING YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR COLLECTIVE ASSES.

I'm still frankly amazed that Livingstone came so close to the truth... wow. He actually referred to Israel and Palestine. (o_0) !!

It's refreshing to see a man with balls and a brain stand up and tell the truth.

YOU GO LIVINGSTONE. YOU GO.

UPDATE:

To get more of the actual story, and not "here's a few sentences about what Livingstone said, and now here's a huge ton more crap that's not even the same story, but just a bunch of ass kissing shit to try to distract you from what he just said.", read the following article on Aljazeera that actually covers the story:

Livingstone blames UK foreign policy, defends Muslim cleric.

Sound familiar?

body counts.

Survey: 25,000 civilians killed in Iraq war.

A few interesting things to note; these are only the deaths that are a direct result of the military conflict that are also verified by at least 3 sources.

If we include the number that have died as a result of lack of starvation and sickness due to the actions of the US and allies... the number balloons to well over 100,000 if not more.

Other things to note in particular:
Explosive devices figures in more than half of the civilian deaths with airstrikes causing 64 percent of such deaths.

(To clarify, that says that 34% of civilian deaths were the direct result of US led airstrikes. Put another way, airstrikes accounted for 64% of the deaths by explosive devices, which as a group accounted for 53% of all civilian deaths.)

That one is for someone in particular *cough* LISA *cough* who was trying to say that it was insurgents and suicide bombers who were killing all the women, children and civilians. Well, there you go Lisa. Like I said. Also, please note the bold item below:


Findings include:
Who was killed?

• 24,865 civilians were reported killed in the first two years.
• Women and children accounted for almost 20% of all civilian deaths.
• Baghdad alone recorded almost half of all deaths.

When did they die?

• 30% of civilian deaths occurred during the invasion phase before 1 May 2003.
• Post-invasion, the number of civilians killed was almost twice as high in year two (11,351) as in year one (6,215).

Who did the killing?

• US-led forces killed 37% of civilian victims.
• Anti-occupation forces/insurgents killed 9% of civilian victims.
• Post-invasion criminal violence accounted for 36% of all deaths.
• Killings by anti-occupation forces, crime and unknown agents have shown a steady rise over the entire period.

What was the most lethal weaponry?

• Over half (53%) of all civilian deaths involved explosive devices.
• Air strikes caused most (64%) of the explosives deaths.
• Children were disproportionately affected by all explosive devices but most severely by air strikes and unexploded ordnance (including cluster bomblets).

How many were injured?

• At least 42,500 civilians were reported wounded.
• The invasion phase caused 41% of all reported injuries.
• Explosive weaponry caused a higher ratio of injuries to deaths than small arms.
• The highest wounded-to-death ratio incidents occurred during the invasion phase.

Who provided the information?

• Mortuary officials and medics were the most frequently cited witnesses.
• Three press agencies provided over one third of the reports used.
• Iraqi journalists are increasingly central to the reporting work.

Speaking today at the launch of the report in London, Professor John Sloboda, FBA, one of the report's authors said: "The ever-mounting Iraqi death toll is the forgotten cost of the decision to go to war in Iraq. On average, 34 ordinary Iraqis have met violent deaths every day since the invasion of March 2003. Our data show that no sector of Iraqi society has escaped. We sincerely hope that this research will help to inform decision-makers around the world about the real needs of the Iraqi people as they struggle to rebuild their country. It remains a matter of the gravest concern that, nearly two and half years on, neither the US nor the UK governments have begun to systematically measure the impact of their actions in terms of human lives destroyed."

To clarify;

What you said:
In your post, you say specifically "what we've done in Iraq lately". Not what the US has done. It's what Iraqi suicide bombers have done.

and

My point is that you can easily blame the Americans for being there - but when it comes to harming innocent children, which that collage is supposed to demonstrate, that's the Iraqis doing that to themselves.

What I said:
notice the people with the burns on their chest and stomach, missing their hands and/or feet? those are generally the result of stepping on or picking up unxploded cluster bombs, which looks sort of like pop cans. there is also a large problem with "collateral damage" when bombing buildings in "surgical strikes" etc.

In short, I'm right, you're wrong. Like I said before. :)

Feel free to get mad and call me an asshole now, or actually go read the dossier [pdf] yourself and see if you can't bend the stats to make yourself look/feel better. Either way, it'll be a learning experience.

more on the Plame case.

Bush vows to fire anyone who committed crime in CIA leak

some choice quotes:

"Anybody who's ever made a mistake in this administration has never paid at all. Everyone who has been right in this administration has been fired."
Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Delaware

and

Wilson called his wife's exposure an act of political retaliation that ended her career. But some observers have questioned whether Plame, then assigned to Washington, met the definition of an undercover agent in the 1982 law that makes revealing the identity of an American spy a felony.

Wilson has said that the CIA considered her exposure to be a crime when it sought a Justice Department investigation of the matter.

"The CIA would not have frivolously referred this to the Justice Department if they did not believe a possible crime had been committed," he told CBS' "Face the Nation."

I think that about sums up my stance on the matter as well.

Particularly interesting.

Can Bush rally US support for Iraq?

I found this article to be particularly interesting because of the contrast between the 2 general types of people responding. You have on one hand, the people who are actually informed about what's going on... and on the other, you have the ignorant folk supporting Bush. "9/11! yay Bush! Get Iraq for 9/11!"

Here's one:

The views of the silent majority are not represented here. They were however, represented very clearly in the election results. You who disagree with Bush and his policies are a minority, deal with it.
Roy, USA

Yeah... because a race that was neck in neck and came out nearly evenly divided, not to mention that statistically, most people are ignorant... and that by looking at the map, you can see that as you go into the more progressive, intelligent, upper class type areas, the vote sways distinctly in favor of Kerry etc.

It's unfortunate that there are so many stupid fucking Christian idiots who believe Bush's bullshit. "well, he's a good, god fearing Christian trying to do his best.. he's just like you and me."

That kind of stupid Christian weakness idealizing ignorance celebrating sheep attitude is screwing this country over so badly. We don't need or want a moronic fuckup Christian idiot in the office running the world into the ground. We want a man who is far more intelligent than we are, capable of understanding the great depth and complexity of worldwide issues and acting on our behalf for the better BECAUSE of his superior ability to fulfill that role.

Abject morons like Roy there and his ilk are sadly a blight on this country... it is people like them that make me ashamed to belong to the human race sometimes.

Sometimes I get angry about people like that... but more often I'm just sad that there are so many more of them than there are truly knowledgeable, intelligent people in relation to these issues.

UPDATE:
I believed President Bush has made a right decision on invading Iraq when it was controlled by Saddam. Under Saddam's regime, Iraq was a haven for terrorists, he provided these terrorists with shelter and financial support. For the American people, you cannot sit and wait for another 9/11 to happen again. For those whose believed President Bush made a wrong decision, please ask yourself a question: "Why did 9/11 happen to the US?"
MP, Little town, Japan

That is an IDEAL example of the kind of brainwashing that Bush and company have tried to put over on everyone. Iraq was NOT a haven for terrorists, Saddam was NOT providing them with funding etc... and Iraq did NOT have ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to do with 9/11. Bush and friends repeatedly implied and inferred this precisely to give the impression that MP above so perfectly illustrates. They were obviously very successful. Luckily most of the American people seem to at least be starting to realize how badly they've been duped... it's a step in the right direction, but I fear it's too little too late. The amount of damage that Bush has done to the world, and also to United States specifically during his presidency is simply staggering in it's scope.

As I read all the comments on that article... it's almost painful to see how sadly brainwashed and clueless some of these people are. But some do ask very good questions, like Dale here:

To Dan in the USA: What part of the long, hard road in the war on terrorism didn't I understand? First, the assumption that terrorism could be defeated. Second, that the Iraq war was the logical next step in defeating terrorism. Third, that the reasons for terrorism aren't being explored or discussed. I agree with Kim in Memphis. Let those that are so hawkish on the war go fight it. There's no bravado in shaking your fist from the relative security of your home.
Dale, USA

Let's clarify those points:

#1 - The assumption that terrorism could be defeated.

#2 - That the Iraq war was the logical next step in defeating terrorism.

#3 - That the reasons for terrorism aren't being explored or discussed.

Seriously... how many people are actually focusing on these points? The first point should be painfully clear... terrorism cannot be defeated through force, as that force only breeds more violence and resistance etc. Not to mention that there is no real army of terrorism to fight against... it's really just fearmongering that the governments use to push through all kinds of measures to increase their ability to control everything and remove your privacy etc... which brings us to point #3. The government, to my knowledge, hasn't even TOUCHED on this subject. They would like to have us think that by saying "these are just extremist muslims.", that they have explained it and been open and honest etc. They're not looking at the things that really have driven these extremists... or the insurgency etc. The US involvement with Israel, the parallels between the US and it's Crusade now with the original Crusades... which is obvious when you actually read some of what the "terrorists" and insurgents are saying... and how often they refer to the US forces as the Crusaders etc. There is a VERY strong distinctly religious facet to this whole mess, and it's one that the US really isn't touching on because it involves our alliance with and support of Israel... a country who is illegally occupying parts of Palestine and committing documented war crimes... a country that we fund with BILLIONS of dollars per year... over $15,000,000.00 PER DAY of US tax dollars goes to them. Not to mention the amount of military hardware and other hardware that we practically give them by selling it to them brand new at 85% discounts etc, so that we don't have to actually count it as giving it to them.

The US government doesn't want to admit that the fact that they've chosen to shit on the constitution and relabel this country as a Christian Nation, and that THAT is one of the reasons we're in this mess. In God We Trust, One Nation Under God... going after the brainwashed terrorist Muslims who've been trained from birth to hate our WAY OF LIFE, not the fact that we've been over in their countries killing their people under the flag of a nation that proclaims itself to be a Christian Nation following in the footsteps of the original Crusaders, fighting what is very obviously a religious war etc.

blah. I don't even want to continue talking about this. It's so stupid. RELIGION IS THE VERY HEART OF THIS WHOLE PROBLEM. PERIOD. Anything else you try to point your finger to is only trying to avoid the VERY ROOT OF THE PROBLEM. RELIGION. Without that RELIGION on all sides here at the very heart of the matter... WE WOULD NOT BE IN THIS MESS. PERIOD. The Jews and their religious belief in their right to Israel and that land... the Muslims and their beliefs in that regard... the Christians and their assistance of the Jews in conflict with the Muslims... the opinion on all sides that THEIRS is the ONE TRUE RELIGION and that they have a divine right and obligation to fight against the others etc because they are wrong... infidels... nonbelievers... attacking the one TRUE religion's faithful etc...

STUPID STUPID STUPID STUPID STUPID!!!!! AARRGHH!!!

I HATE RELIGION. Most of the worlds woes come down to Religion and the kind of antiquated and completely clusterfucked ignorant stupid mindset that both breeds it and which it turn breeds. BOTTOM LINE.

interesting news

Bush aide 'is source of CIA leak'

UN at odds over internet's future

Report: UK 'at risk' over Iraq war

for the anonymous coward who asked if I didn't like black people and Muslims.

the blue dots are where I lived, all of which aside from my parents, are in the largely black low income areas. there is a reason I have a distrust of meeting black people IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS.

now, a real discussion here would cover the fact that prejudice and racism etc creates an environment that forces people to stay in this situation... perpetuates it etc...

but frankly I think that's not really related to me. I judge people based on their character, skills, intelligence and actions etc. and unfortunately, if I see a black guy doing something stereotypically "black" or whatever... then generally I make a point of their being black because they're just perpetuating the reason for the stereotype... etc. the bent should be obvious at this point.

it's like when Bill Cosby railed against the them for making the kind of rap music they did.. for drinking and drugging and dealing and domestic violence and gang violence and all that other crap...

here, go read it for yourself.

(as for the Muslim part... I think all religions and religious people are retarded. I don't even think I need to explain that part. I'm not just picking on the Muslims... generally I'm lighter on them than Judaism or Christianity... and at some points even defend them, as in the case of Israel versus Palestine etc.)

Karl Rove sucks.

Red Rove-r, red rover is that the press coming over? (w/video)

This whole mess just pisses me off when I stop to think about it.

Read this for a little more background info... that makes the above article even more morbidly humorous.

It sickens me the amount of sheer bullshit that our government has been getting away with lately... it's insane.

Mind you, I was reading the other day about the 2 reporters that were involved... and how one, a woman, didn't reveal her source and is now being sent to the prison a high profile terrorist is being held at... and how the other reporter is going to testify, so he's fine. (New York Times reporter jailed, Miller's New Home in Virginia Known as a 'New Generation' Jail -- But Moussaoui is Fellow Inmate)

Now... normally I would stick up for protecting the right of the reporter not to reveal their source... but in this case, which seems to be a case of maliciously revealing the identity of a covert CIA operative, which not only ends their career, but also puts their life at risk... that seems like criminal behavior to me and in light of that, the whole "not reveal my source" thing kind of goes out the window.

Not knowing all the facts, I can't really weigh in more than that... and while I do give the woman credit for standing up for her position... I wonder both about whether or not she's doing the right thing, and whether or not it's justifiable to send her to prison with a terrorist... as though the two things are comparable.

I guess that all just leads me back to the top of this post.

Read it and weep.

UPDATE:
White House denials on Rove fall silent.
White House defense of Rove goes silent.
CIA Leak Denials on Rove's Behalf Crumble.
White House Won't Comment on Rove Leak.
White House clams up on CIA leak.
W. House Suddenly Silent On Rove.

It's nice to see some media outlets actually covering this... and a couple even linking to it near the top of the page! :D

(CNN isn't showing this on their US page, or the International page... but it does show up on http://us.cnn.com/, which Jen had to point out to me because my CNN defaults to the International edition.)

patents are horrible.

Concern over BRCA2 patent

European geneticists say changes would force them to ask whether women are Ashkenazi Jews

(thanks proc)

speaks for itself.

I agree. Fuck Natalee Holloway.

Kuro5hin has an EXCELLENT article lambasting the media and it's insanely disproportionate coverage of this trivial case.

just read it. I completely agree with what he says.

Fuck Natalee Holloway.

A post for the ignorant.

A few people have been stopping by my blog and making ignorant statements based on a profound lack of understanding of the past and present actions of the United States government, as well as international treaties (not to mention human psychology etc).

I hope that the following links should help clear up that lack of understanding, and that anyone who wishes to post here would at least take the time to peruse these links and try to gain some understanding before ignorantly aggravating both myself and the other readers and commenters on my blog.

Thanks.

U.S. Foreign Policy in the Periphery: A 50-Year Retrospective.

The Laws of War.

and for good measure, to hopefully head off the childish "good versus evil" types:
Evil.

and last but not least; Terrorist.

Please think before you type. If you're not sure about what you're saying, then go double check first before making yourself look like an idiot, because odds are, I will illustrate your lack of understanding.

There is intelligent discourse to be had here. Valid points to be made. But bickering with ignorant morons who lack any real understanding of the larger issues involved here is a waste of time. For instance, touching on the fact, based on an actual knowledge of the Laws of War, that the "terrorists" are not abiding by them... which leads into a more in-depth look at exactly why the "terrorists" are led to use the means they do to wage their war, and why they not only do not follow the Laws of War, by why they cannot follow them. That is the kind of discussion that merits the time and attention of both myself and my readers.

Thanks again.

a reminder.

This is just a little taste of what we've done in Iraq lately. (and a dash of Afghanistan for good measure)

Just in case anyone forgot.



Now you think about that for a minute.

Independence Day

for those of you here in the United States celebrating July 4th today... maybe you should stop to think about what that actually means.

your forefathers were, by todays standards, terrorists. at least as far as what your government would have you believe.

they rebelled against the government, they illegally kept their firearms... they created this "freedom" which you are so quick to shit away in exchange for some alleged safety against an almost wholly imaginary threat.

before you party or light a firework... maybe you should stop to really think about just what it took to win the independence you're so ignorantly celebrating. and contrast it to what the government of today is doing... and take a really hard look at what they would try to convince you that gun control means etc.

just remember, gun control only controls the people who obey the law. removing your right to bear arms is not going to affect crime, but it sure as hell is going to prevent you from standing up to your government as the founding fathers intended.

think about it... where do many of the major gun crimes happen? day care... post office... schools... and guess what? they're all regulated and protected gun-free zones. now how about a gun show... have you EVER heard of someone going on a shooting spree at a gun show? or any violence at all for that matter?

think about that kids.


"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

Thomas Jefferson
(1743-1826), US Founding Father, drafted the Declaration of Independence, 3rd US President
November 13, 1787, letter to William S. Smith

--------

U.S. Constitution - Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

another good article.

Is there no end to U.S. scandals?

The case is exacerbated by European displeasure at the manner in which U.S. intelligence interacts with them. U.S. agencies are eager to get information from all sources but are reluctant to share what they know forcing European agencies – which unlike the American have to operate in environments with much higher levels of democratic protections and oversight mechanisms – to work in the dark.

yep. that's right. the United States is well on it's way down the list of free countries in the world. it's already a crock of shit that we still call ourselves the most free... that's a patent lie. but it's just getting worse... more and more countries are moving ahead of us to be more free, and mostly because we're actively and agressively moving towards less freedom here.

our government keeps moving to give itself more power and take away more rights and freedoms from the people... and this whole "terrorism" bullshit has been a catalyst for that... grease in the gears... it's been drummed up into a fearmongering frenzy that we have to give up our rights and freedoms to protect us from THE TERRORISTS, but really the chances are so small as to be insignificant that we'd ever personally fall victim to ANY terrorist acts WHATSOEVER. you have a better chance of dying on your way to work. hell, a FAR greater chance of dying on your way to work... but your government isn't trying to stop you from driving are they?

and meanwhile, you have Bush and friends lying to the American People, Congress and the world at large while waging pre-emptive war on a country that had NOTHING AT ALL to do with 9/11 while drilling the inferred connection into the American psyche to the point where the vast majority of people FIRMLY believe that Saddam really was in with Al Qaeda and behind 9/11... and the WMD's were just the icing on the cake really... bullshit... but at least seemingly more valid as a reason for war... which we now know to ALSO be total bullshit.

in the meantime, we've created the worlds greatest hotbed for terrorist activities and training, in the middle of a massive Iraqi insurgency to get the U.S. Occupation out of their country etc. hell, now I've even got my anti-war friends saying that we have to stay in Iraq because now we've created such a horrific clusterfuck over there that we can't leave.

so... what then? we just spend the next 20 years sending our children off to die and killing hundreds of thousands MORE Iraqi's???? because Bush and his friends lied and got us into a horrible mess with no plan to get us out and no real plan for the war because their only intention ever was to just get us in there and get Saddam out and get our hands on the oil etc? a foothold into the region?

Impeach the bastard and send him and his buddies to prison. pull our troops OUT of Iraq, admit that we SERIOUSLY screwed up and that our president was a lying piece of shit. let the region fend for itself.

and before you say "well, we made the mess, now we have to clean it up"... if you even THINK about saying that, then you'd damn well better flat out admit how FUCKED Bush and his ilk are and demand impeachment.

for the love of god... Clintons blowjobs didn't cost a single fucking life. and they impeached him for it? Bush has already cost the lives of over 1,700 American troops and contributed to the deaths of well over an estimated 100,000 Iraqi's so far. (and that number comes from CNN, over 8 months ago. no telling what they're at now. the officially reported and verifiable through at least 2 sources deaths are only at around 25,000 to 40,000... but it's generally accepted that the totals are much much higher.)

anyway... I digress. the point being... our country has been overrun by a bunch of imperialistic fascist warmongers who have been lying to the American people and waging wholly illegal wars and plunging the entire planet into a precarious situation in it's march for a New World Order.

it's time we impeach Bush and throw the lot of them in prison and restore our country to what it's supposed to be... back to the constitution and the ideals of the founding fathers. get the governments hands out of every aspect of our private lives, and get our troops out of all these other countries.... start repairing our international ties, and maybe, just maybe start restoring a little bit of trust and respect... but most importantly, FIX THE BULLSHIT HERE IN AMERICA.

get your religion out of my government first and foremost. and quit using the constitution for toilet paper. start respecting people who have different beliefs and treating people like adults. quit legislating your religious morals on everyone else and thinking that you have the right to strip away personal liberty and freedom in the name of imaginary threats and terror and creating a christian police state as a precursor to literally creating a world police and spreading your fascist ideology around the entire globe.

FUCK YOU GEORGE W. BUSH. AND FUCK YOUR CRONIES TOO.

I just hope you all go down for this... and go down HARD. I can only dream that the American people will really wake up and finally smell the coffee and be pushed far enough to finally push back. I can see the people stirring... unrest is rising... the majority of the nation has swayed against Bush and the war... but Bush and friends are still avoiding responsibility and pushing forward with a vengeance.

check out the machinations of Thomas P.M. Barnett to see some of what I'm talking about. then you'll get an idea of the kind of New World Order the government is really pushing for. do some digging on this guy, you might be surprised.

I can't rant anymore on this for now, I'm spent. over and out.

Impeach the lying bastard.

and take his cronies down with him.

Will the U.S. Anti-War Movement Impeach Bush?

Sheehan's sentiments of prosecuting Bush and Co. were echoed at the rally by members of Congress. The deliberate misleading of Congress is an impeachable offense under the U.S. Constitution. In addition, under the precedents established at Nuremberg, Bush and other members of his administration such as Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Condeleeza Rice, and others, could be indicted and tried for war crimes under international law.

it's a long article, full of information covering different views as well as touching on the white houses refusal to deal with the Downing St. Memo etc.

Clinton got the impeachment crap for getting a blow-job... don't you think that lying to the american people and congress and costing the lives of thousands upon thousands of people while drastically reducing the security and global perception of the united states and using it as an excuse to start depriving our own citizens of basic rights and freedoms...

hell, impeachment is the least of what I think those bastards deserve. I say throw em all in a uniform and send them to the front line. then them take care of the mess they've created.

on people who can't spell.

Hackers, Spelling, and Grammar?

and specifically comments such as this one.

personally I do think less of people who can't spell. I think it does in fact represent a lack of cognitive ability.

which is one of the reasons why in my #phreadom channel, we make a point to correct each other on spelling... some, like myself, yath, proc etc. are better at it than others... (like knix, shambuh etc) ;-)

one thing we obviously don't do much of is properly capitalizing the first letters of sentences. :-/ about the only time I make a point to do that is when I'm writing a paper or very important document or letter etc.