Members of the American public ponder George W. Bush's latest defense of his "policy" on the Iraq war.

Hey, this guy makes Richard Nixon look good, says a New York Times editorial, 12/01/05.

PLAN: WE WIN

We've seen it before: an embattled president so swathed in his inner circle that he completely loses touch with the public and wanders around among small knots of people who agree with him. There was Lyndon Johnson in the 1960's, Richard Nixon in the 1970's, and George H. W. Bush in the 1990's. Now it's his son's turn.

It has been obvious for months that Americans don't believe the war is going just fine, and they needed to hear that President Bush gets that. They wanted to see that he had learned from his mistakes and adjusted his course, and that he had a measurable and realistic plan for making Iraq safe enough to withdraw United States troops. Americans didn't need to be convinced of Mr. Bush's commitment to his idealized version of the war. They needed to be reassured that he recognized the reality of the war.

Instead, Mr. Bush traveled 32 miles from the White House to the Naval Academy and spoke to yet another of the well-behaved, uniformed audiences that have screened him from the rest of America lately. If you do not happen to be a midshipman, you'd have to have been watching cable news at midmorning on a weekday to catch him.

The address was accompanied by a voluminous handout entitled "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq," which the White House grandly calls the newly declassified version of the plan that has been driving the war. If there was something secret about that plan, we can't figure out what it was. The document, and Mr. Bush's speech, were almost entirely a rehash of the same tired argument that everything's going just fine. Mr. Bush also offered the usual false choice between sticking to his policy and beating a hasty and cowardly retreat.

On the critical question of the progress of the Iraqi military, the president was particularly optimistic, and misleading. He said, for instance, that Iraqi security forces control major areas, including the northern and southern provinces and cities like Najaf. That's true if you believe a nation can be built out of a change of clothing: these forces are based on party and sectarian militias that have controlled many of these same areas since the fall of Saddam Hussein but now wear Iraqi Army uniforms. In other regions, the most powerful Iraqi security forces are rogue militias that refuse to disarm and have on occasion turned their guns against American troops, like Moktada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army.

Mr. Bush's vision of the next big step is equally troubling: training Iraqi forces well enough to free American forces for more of the bloody and ineffective search-and-destroy sweeps that accomplish little beyond alienating the populace.

What Americans wanted to hear was a genuine counterinsurgency plan, perhaps like one proposed by Andrew F. Krepinevich Jr., a leading writer on military strategy: find the most secure areas with capable Iraqi forces. Embed American trainers with those forces and make the region safe enough to spend money on reconstruction, thus making friends and draining the insurgency. Then slowly expand those zones and withdraw American forces.

Americans have been clamoring for believable goals in Iraq, but Mr. Bush stuck to his notion of staying until "total victory." His strategy document defines that as an Iraq that "has defeated the terrorists and neutralized the insurgency"; is "peaceful, united, stable, democratic and secure"; and is a partner in the war on terror, an integral part of the international community, and "an engine for regional economic growth and proving the fruits of democratic governance to the region."

That may be the most grandiose set of ambitions for the region since the vision of Nebuchadnezzar's son Belshazzar, who saw the hand writing on the wall. Mr. Bush hates comparisons between Vietnam and Iraq. But after watching the president, we couldn't resist reading Richard Nixon's 1969 Vietnamization speech. Substitute the Iraqi constitutional process for the Paris peace talks, and Mr. Bush's ideas about the Iraqi Army are not much different from Nixon's plans - except Nixon admitted the war was going very badly (which was easier for him to do because he didn't start it), and he was very clear about the risks and huge sacrifices ahead.

A president who seems less in touch with reality than Richard Nixon needs to get out more.

Chemical Spill in Harbin, China -- "bad" facts denied by authorities

An explosion and major chemical spill last week near city of Harbin, China sent one hundred tons of benzene and other toxic chemical into the Songhua River from which Harbin and other towns and cities in the region take their drinking water. For days following the accident, local and national officials denied that anything dangerous had happened. A friend of mine, Prof. D. Wang, teaches philosophy at the Harbin University of Science and Technology and sent the following observations (reprinted with permission).

"Generally speaking, everything here has not been going too bad these days, thanks to plenty of water mobilized to this city in time. Certainly, a panic spread at the beginning of the accident. All middle and primary schools in the city have been closed until 30th this month, and some people had departed in panic with the rumor of forthcoming earthquake around Harbin. The day before yesterday, the city's water supply system has run again, but it was noticed that the water could not be drunk until the next noticement releases. Now it seems that everything will go as usual from tommorrow.

"The accident has drawn much attention not only of the people in this country but foreign governments and people as well. The case highlights how failures of such a social-technological system could result a public crisis in such a country in which the "bad" facts are often disguised by interested parties. Many comments on the issue in BBS of my university has been given to such topics as inadequate site of the chemical plant, disguise of the disaster information, lack of a reaction mechanism of public crisis, and so on. Knowing the thing could be otherwise if there were robust political arrangements in advance, people are looking forward to substantial improvements resulted from the accident.

"The long range outcomes need to be carefully observed, and the event surely is a good example showing the political aspect of technology and engineering."

* * * * *

[Of course, we have many similar problems in the USA at present -- a government that does not want to pay attention to "bad" facts. The whole situation in Iraq is one example, along with the Bush administration response to Hurricane Katrina. An unfortunate trend in the early 21st century is the attempt to impose political will over recalcitrant facts. - LW]

Here's a later, more hopeful comment from Prof. Wang.

"There is good news to tell you. My city's water system began to run as usual in the morning yesterday (some areas in the day before yesterday), and tap water could be used in safety, namely, up to the national standards of drinking water. In addition, I was told that a new water supplying system would be built up next year, using water in a dam tens miles away from the city rather than polluted water of the Songhua River (e.g., fishes in the river could have rarely been taken as food due to Hg contamination since the early 1980s). In fact, the national drinking water standard of China itself is one of the sources of problems, which issued in 1985, far behind the standards of the States or Europe. It was said that new standards could possibly be issued by the end of this year. I am not sure whether the Harbin Accident may speedup the birth of the new standards or not. But it is certain that the standard itself has to be a social and political product."

For torture, but against the arts and humanities: an emerging pattern?

In a bold move presumably based upon deeply held principles, nine U.S. senators voted against imposing limits upon ways of interrogating prisoners detained in Iraq and elsewhere. Here's the list of those who gave their hearty support to torture:

Allard (R-CO)
Bond (R-MO)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Stevens (R-AK)

In a related move, an advisory panel of 100 Republican members of the House of Representatives called for an end to all funding for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). The same group, The Republican Study Committee, has also called for the elimination of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). I could not find the full list of the legislative anti-humanists, but presenting the current proposal were:

Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.)
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas)

[Suggested reading for both stories: Eugene Ionesco, The Rhinoceros]

Intelligent design -- not working well in the U.S.A.?

If the Creator is beneficently leading the world onward and upward to a more "intelligent design," he/she seems to have dropped the ball in the U.S. A study on the prevalence of religious belief in various societies to important measures of well-being in those societies suggests that America is falling behind nations where faith in God is less heavily hyped. The idea that strong relious beliefs are the foundation of a good society seems questionnable, and not just in the headlines about rampant corruption among sanctimonious fundamentalist "Christians" in the Bush administration. Here's the story from The Times Online

* * * * * *
Societies worse off 'when they have God on their side'
By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent


RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today.

According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems.

The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society.

It compares the social peformance of relatively secular countries, such as Britain, with the US, where the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution. Many conservative evangelicals in the US consider Darwinism to be a social evil, believing that it inspires atheism and amorality.

Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, believing that it helps to lower rates of violent crime, murder, suicide, sexual promiscuity and abortion. The benefits of religious belief to a society have been described as its “spiritual capital”. But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills.

The paper, published in the Journal of Religion and Society, a US academic journal, reports: “Many Americans agree that their churchgoing nation is an exceptional, God-blessed, shining city on the hill that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly sceptical world.

“In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.

“The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developing democracies, sometimes spectacularly so.”

Gregory Paul, the author of the study and a social scientist, used data from the International Social Survey Programme, Gallup and other research bodies to reach his conclusions.

He compared social indicators such as murder rates, abortion, suicide and teenage pregnancy.

The study concluded that the US was the world’s only prosperous democracy where murder rates were still high, and that the least devout nations were the least dysfunctional. Mr Paul said that rates of gonorrhoea in adolescents in the US were up to 300 times higher than in less devout democratic countries. The US also suffered from “ uniquely high” adolescent and adult syphilis infection rates, and adolescent abortion rates, the study suggested.

Mr Paul said: “The study shows that England, despite the social ills it has, is actually performing a good deal better than the USA in most indicators, even though it is now a much less religious nation than America.”

He said that the disparity was even greater when the US was compared with other countries, including France, Japan and the Scandinavian countries. These nations had been the most successful in reducing murder rates, early mortality, sexually transmitted diseases and abortion, he added.

Mr Paul delayed releasing the study until now because of Hurricane Katrina. He said that the evidence accumulated by a number of different studies suggested that religion might actually contribute to social ills. “I suspect that Europeans are increasingly repelled by the poor societal performance of the Christian states,” he added.

He said that most Western nations would become more religious only if the theory of evolution could be overturned and the existence of God scientifically proven. Likewise, the theory of evolution would not enjoy majority support in the US unless there was a marked decline in religious belief, Mr Paul said.

“The non-religious, proevolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator.

“The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted.”

Virtual War: We get 'em coming and going!

Although declining recruitment figures indicate that the tactic hasn't been working very well recently, the U.S. military has been using an sophisticated first person shooter video game, "America's Army," as a way to attract young men to sign up. Now it comes to light that video games are being used at the other end of the military experience, when soldiers leave the service and have to deal with the horrors of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Here's the story from the increasing non-plused NPR on this new form of therapy. Note the Owellian title of the research firm involved.

"Using components from the popular game Full Spectrum Warrior, psychologist Skip Rizzo and his colleagues have fashioned a "virtual" world that simulates the sources of combat stress.

The project is a joint venture between the Institute for Creative Technologies -- a cutting-edge research lab at the University of Southern California -- and the Office of Naval Research. The object is to help veterans come to terms with what they've experienced in places like Iraq and Afghanistan by immersing vets in the sights and sounds of those theaters of battle.

The soldier being treated wears VR goggles and headphones. Using a tablet-based interface, a therapist can activate or remove the sounds of gunshots or the sight of smoke, depending on a patient's reaction. The idea is to re-introduce the patients to the experiences that triggered the trauma, gradually, until the memory no longer incapacitates them.

Eventually, Rizzo believes the therapy will include other stimuli, such as vibrations to simulate the impact of bombs or rumbling of tanks, and even the smells of war -- the body odor, garbage and spices of urban combat, for example.

Early results from trials suggest virtual reality therapy is uniquely suited to a generation raised on video games. . . . ."

* * * * * * *
[Uniquely suited, indeed. Here's the roadmap: from virtual shooting gallery to real shooting gallery back to the virtual shooting gallery. This is how America prepares its best and brightest for the challenges of contemporary life. - LW]

Chris Gibson: thinker, raconteur, restless soul, friend to many (1954-2005)

He was the most intense person I've ever known, someone who could talk with you for hours and hours on end about an amazingly wide range of topics -- music, philosophy, religion, politics, you name it. In my home town of San Luis Obispo, California, Chris Gibson became a local character, a friend to many who visited his "office hours" outside the downtown Starbucks, enjoying his insights and incisive wit.

When I met him in the late 1960s Chris was recovering from a serious motor cycle acident. He was fascinated by the equisite clarity of Wittgenstein's philosophy and the pure sound of the classic tracker pipe organs, especially the way Helmut Walcha played J.S. Bach organ concertos. He hoped to travel to Europe to become an organ craftsman, a quest for spritual and practical fulfillment that was, alas, never realized. Instead, Chris worked as a fisherman in Alaska, carpenter in Central California, groundskeeper, and occasional writer of unpublished pieces roughly in the vein of Bukowski, but even more direct and brutally honest. Perhaps he should be remembered as the godfather of nanotechnology, for his Bullshit Detector was sensitive right down to the smallest, sub-molecular particle.

Chris Gibson died in a freak accident in Cayucos on July 26. Jeff McMahon has written a fine tribute to Chris in Contrary Magazine. The same issue contains a piece of Gibson's writing, "The Wages of Insomnia," which he described as follows:

"Remember that I wrote that thing without any sleep and it does have something to say but be forewarned that there is also a strong sense of beating a bush with a stick to prove you can't go around it in there."

(The photo above was taken by Sevastian Roberts a day or so before Chris died.)

A truly democratic technology in action

Using digital cameras and streaming video on the Internet, one of the participants prepared a portrait of the situation at Camp Casey near Crawford, Texas, where supporters of Cindy Sheehan have gathered. The whole video is about a half hour long.

This sure as hell beats the nattering cynicism of the cable TV coverage and commentary about this event. Are we seeing a contemporary Peace Woodstock of sorts?

Parents speak out on (the latest) war

Cindy Sheehan’s vigil in Crawford, Texas renews questions about why America has gone to war in Iraq. Her son, Casey, 24, was killed in combat in Baghdad in April 2004. Sheehan’s requests for an audience with George W. Bush to discuss the purposes of the American occupation have been rebuffed the President and administration officials.

The story reminds me of an experience from my past. Working as a student intern at the Pentagon during the summer of 1967, I took a lunch break to watch a ceremony presenting a Congressional Medal of Honor posthumously to a Vietnam War soldier who had died heroically in battle. Two military bands played, including one in Revolutionary War costume, and cannons fired several volleys. Civilian and military bigwigs gathered on the steps of the fortress to drone their solemn speeches. The father of the young man received the medal, thanking the government officials for recognizing his son’s valor. Much to their chagrin, however, he added that he was not certain his son had died for a good cause. As I recall, he spoke with Congressmen about his doubts later that afternoon. His comments brought a storm of controversy in the press and on television. The country was just then beginning to wonder whether or not the war and its costs were justified.

Have we reached a similar turning point in public sentiments about Iraq?

Beyond Alan Sokal -- the randomly generated science paper!

In the grand tradition of hoaxes and spoofs, a field of excellence that holds a special place in the heart of this Masked Marauder and Automatic Professor, there has been an interesting breakthrough. Three graduate students at MIT submitted a paper to a computer science conference, one randomly generated by a computer program. Here are excerpts from The Chronicle of Higher Education story by Andrea L. Foster, "Students Whose Phony Paper Brought a Conference Invitation Are Stars of Their Own Video."

"Three Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate students attracted a flurry of media attention in April after a questionable academic conference accepted their randomly-generated, nonsensical paper. Now the students are stars of a lighthearted video they made when they went to the conference even though their invitations had been withdrawn.

"The three -- Jeremy A. Stribling, Maxwell Krohn, and Daniel Aguayo -- are computer-science students studying parallel and distributed operating systems. The organizer of the conference, called the Ninth World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics, and Informatics, had initially invited them to attend after accepting their phony paper, which was titled "Rooter: A Methodology for the Typical Unification of Access Points and Redundancy."

".... During their technical session, the students filmed themselves presenting three meaningless, jargon-laden papers written by the computer program they had created. For additional verisimilitude, the students assumed fake names and donned wigs and mustaches while each presenting one of the three papers. The papers were "Harnessing Byzantine Fault Tolerance Using Classical Theory," "Synthesizing Checksums and Lambda Calculus Using Jog," and "On the Study of the Ethernet.""

* * * *
Here's a site where you can download the video of the session, complete with a lachrymose musical soundtrack. The quality is right up there with the Yes Men satires. Alas, the link to the story is short term because the Chronicle requires subcriptions.

"That's not an alien tripod! It's the the Lafarge cement plant burning TIRES!"

Much of the fire and smoke shown in Spielberg's "War of the Worlds" happens in the lovely town of Athens, New York on the Hudson River. It's the place where the ferry boat is attacked by alien tripods. While all that smoke vanishes at the film's conclusion, some much more noxious fumes are being planned for an old, decrepit cement plant in nearby Revena. The Larfarge company proposes to kock a hole in the smokestack and burn about 5 million tires a year. Since I live downwind from the stack, I'm concerned, as are many of my neighbors in Columbia, Greene and Rensselaer Counties. Smelled any burning tires recently? (There's no end to the ambitious, money-making ideas for destroying the region and our lungs.)

Here's the story on Lafarge from the Albany Times Union, 7/22/05.

Cement plant pares plans to burn tires
Public comment sought as state reviews Lafarge's application

By Patrick Cain
Special to the Times Union

ALBANY--After two years of reviews and revisions Lafarge North America has
filed a new application with the state Department of Environmental
Conservation to burn 4.8 million tires annually at its Ravena cement plant.

The next step is to collect public sentiment as part of the approval
process. The proposal is open to public review until Sept. 2.

The application for a permit is available in the Albany office of DEC, and
in the libraries of Ravena and Castleton, which is downwind of the plant. A
public information session on the application is scheduled at 7pm, Aug. 4,
at the A.W. Becker Elementary School, 1146 Route 9W, Selkirk.

"People need to let us know what they think of the application," said
William J. Clarke, Department of Environmental Conservation region-4 permit
administrator.

Comments can be submitted to Clarke, NYSDEC Region 4 Headquarters, 1150 N.
Westcott Road, Schenectady, NY 12306 or emailed to r4dep@gw.dec.state.ny.us.

Earlier this year the company filed an application to burn 6 million tires
but has since lowered its request. If passed, the 4.8 million tires would
reduce the amount of coal and coke burned by 35,000 tons and serve as 20
percent of the energy used at the plant.

Friends of Hudson, the 4,000-member group that mobilized against St.
Lawrence Cement plant's proposal in Columbia County, are taking aim against
Lafarge because of environmental concerns.

Global warming? What me worry?

Scientist says humans cause global warming

Ralph J. Cicerone, president of the National Academy of Sciences, testified to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee this week, arguing that global warming is real and a consequence of human activity.

"Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is now at its highest level in 400,000 years and it continues to rise," said Cicerone, an atmospheric scientist who left as chancellor of University of California-Irvine to become academy president this month. "Nearly all climate scientists today believe that much of Earth's current warming has been caused by increases in the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, mostly from the burning of fuels."

* * * * * * * *
[Who do these scientists think they are anyway, using systematic observation, scientific theory and critical thought to question the cherished beliefs of George W. Bush? And what is this "National Academy," some kind of liberal advocacy outfit? Perhaps some Rove style intimidation (cut their research funding?) will bring these guys back to the yellow cake truth as revealed to our great leader. - LW]

Ethanol: A good liquid fuel alternative?

A new study by ecologist David Pimintel at Cornell (shown above) and engineering prof. Tad Patzek of U.C. Berkeley indicates that "There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel....These strategies are not sustainable." Their method involves calculating the energy inputs used in producing fuels from corn, switch grass and other kinds of biomass. On that basis, more energy is expended than produced.

It's been more than more than thirty years since the "energy crisis" of the 1970s and we still have not achieved much clarity about how to evaluate proposals for alternative energy.

Terrorism and engineering education

A peculiar wrinkle from investigations on the London bombings is speculation that terrorists have been recruiting young technical professionals in the UK. If nothing else, this reinforces the need to teach engineers and IT students skills of open-minded, critical thinking along with the powerful technical disciplines they learn. If, in fact, members of al-Quaeda has spotted this Achilles heel within modern higher education, they are even more clever than we’d suspected.

From “Leaked No 10 dossier reveals Al-Qaeda’s British recruits,” by Robert Winnett and David Leppard in the Times OnLine:

AL-QAEDA is secretly recruiting affluent, middle-class Muslims in British universities and colleges to carry out terrorist attacks in this country, leaked Whitehall documents reveal.

A network of “extremist recruiters” is circulating on campuses targeting people with “technical and professional qualifications”, particularly engineering and IT degrees.

Yesterday it emerged that last week’s London bombings were a sophisticated attack with all the devices detonating on the Underground within 50 seconds of each other. The police believe those behind the outrage may be home-grown British terrorists with no criminal backgrounds and possessing technical expertise.

A joint Home Office and Foreign Office dossier — Young Muslims and Extremism — prepared for the prime minister last year, said Britain might now be harbouring thousands of Al-Qaeda sympathisers. . . . .

* * * * * *
[While we're at it, why not throw in a class or two on basic ethics, perhaps discussing upon the moral depravity of killing innocent civilians. Of course, this question would be equally relevant for those now in charge at the Pentagon and White House. - LW]

Strangling the "American Dream" -- important unreported news

Here via Xymphora are complementary stories about the death of the American Dream of education, jobs and prosperity and the rise of that dream elsewhere.

"Going numb as American dream fades away"

"Toyota to build 100,000 vehicles per year in Woodstock, Ont., starting 2008"

Stories of this sort used to be a major focus in the press and among progressive policians, but they are seldom mentioned these days (hey, let's talk about abortion, gay marriage, Michael Jackson, the latest abduction, etc.) The idea that they key to economic strength is tax breaks for the wealthy rather than strong social support for working people is a myth that, along with fantasies of empire, is rapidly erroding the economic, political and cultural fabric of the U.S.A.

The Live 8 agenda questioned

The millions of people who enjoyed the Live 8 concerts in person and on television yesterday were repeatedly urged to visit the organization's website and sign the ONE Declaration calling for action "to help the poorest people of the world overcome AIDS and extreme poverty." Although certainly informed by noble intentions, the policy approach outlined by Bob Geldol, Bono and their colleagues needs a close second look.

As George Mobiot points out in a recent essay, the exact terms for the debt relief proposed for African nations often comes with conditions that involve privatization and other neo-liberal "reforms" that could create more trouble than the debt itself. The spectacle of rock stars and movie idols making nice with the likes of Tony Blair and Georeg W. Bush, should give us pause. It may be that the world's poor are being sold down the river yet again, as the music plays on and we all cheer wildly.

Mobiot writes of the "two bards," Bono and Geldof:
"I understand the game they're playing. They believe that praising the world's most powerful men is more persuasive than criticising them. The problem is that in doing so they turn the political campaign developed by the global justice movement into a philanthropic one. They urge the G8 leaders to do more to help the poor. But they say nothing about ceasing to do harm....

"Listen to these men - Bush, Blair and their two bards - and you could forget that the rich nations had played any role in Africa's accumulation of debt, or accumulation of weapons, or loss of resources, or collapse in public services, or concentration of wealth and power by unaccountable leaders. Listen to them and you would imagine that the G8 was conceived as a project to help the world's poor.

"I have yet to read a statement by either rock star that suggests a critique of power. They appear to believe that a consensus can be achieved between the powerful and the powerless, that they can assemble a great global chorus of rich and poor to sing from the same sheet. They do not seem to understand that, while the G8 maintains its grip on the instruments of global governance, a shared anthem of peace and love is about as meaningful as the old Coca-Cola ad."

* * * * * * * *
[Of course, this is not the first time that rock and roll has been enlisted for grand ideals as critical thought was suspended. -- LW]

Rocket science -- the new arms race in Iraq

Although the Bush administration tells us that the insurgency is dwindling and in its "last thoes," it turns out that its "thoes" include some new, more lethal bomb making techniques. From the New York Times:

June 22, 2005
Iraqi Rebels Refine Bomb Skills, Pushing Toll of G.I.'s Higher
By DAVID S. CLOUD

WASHINGTON, June 21 - American casualties from bomb attacks in Iraq have reached new heights in the last two months as insurgents have begun to deploy devices that leave armored vehicles increasingly vulnerable, according to military records.

Last month there were about 700 attacks against American forces using so-called improvised explosive devices, or I.E.D.'s, the highest number since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, according to the American military command in Iraq and a senior Pentagon military official. Attacks on Iraqis also reached unprecedented levels, Lt. Gen. John Vines, a senior American ground commander in Iraq, told reporters on Tuesday.

The surge in attacks, the officials say, has coincided with the appearance of significant advancements in bomb design, including the use of "shaped" charges that concentrate the blast and give it a better chance of penetrating armored vehicles, causing higher casualties.

Another change, a senior military officer said, has been the detonation of explosives by infrared lasers, an innovation aimed at bypassing electronic jammers used to block radio-wave detonators.

I.E.D.'s of all types caused 33 American deaths in May, and there have been at least 35 fatalities so far in June, the highest toll over a two-month period, according to statistics assembled by Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, a Web site that tracks official figures. . . . .

The shaped charge explosion fires a projectile "at a very rapid rate, sufficient to penetrate certain levels of armor," General Conway said, adding that weapons employing shaped charges had caused American casualties in the last two months. He did not give details.

A Pentagon official involved in combating the devices said shaped charges seen so far appeared crude but required considerable expertise, suggesting insurgents were able to draw on well-trained bomb-makers, possibly even rocket scientists from the former government. Shaped charges and rocket engines are similar, the official said.

* * * * * * * * * * * *
[LW: At last, the light at the end of the tunnel -- a bomb blast!]

Botero paints scenes of Abu Ghraib

Columbian painter Fernando Botero has long painted the violence and suffering of political struggles in his home country. This week an exhibtion of his paintings opened in Rome, including an number of recent works that depict scenes of torture at Abu Ghraib. This link shows some of the paintings along with an interview with the artist in Spanish. Not for children or the faint of heart.

Here's a news story in English about the exhibit.

- Langdon

Software design for totalitarian regimes

A story in the L.A. Times notes the helpful role that a Microsoft program plays for the Chinese government. The Bill Gates people have agree to flag certain forbidden terms, discouraging Chinese people from using them. I suppose this qualifies as the next "moster app" (or is that "monstosity app"?).

* * * * *

As China Censors the Internet, Money Talks
By Mark Magnier and Joseph Menn, Times Staff Writers


BEIJING — Chinese bloggers using a new Microsoft service to post messages titled "democracy," "capitalism," "liberty" or "human rights" are greeted with a bright yellow warning.

"This message includes forbidden language," it scolds. "Please delete the prohibited expression."

The restrictions were agreed upon by Microsoft and its Chinese partner, the government-linked Shanghai Alliance Investment. The limits have sparked a debate here and in the online world about how free speech could be threatened when the world's most powerful software company forges an alliance with the largest Communist country.

Multinational companies from cigarette makers to baby formula companies routinely change their advertising and other corporate behavior to adapt to local laws. Experts say that Internet companies such as Microsoft are often the focus of controversy because their products are linked to free speech issues, and many rules governing blogs — or Web logs — and other electronic speech are evolving.

"There's a spectrum here," said Jonathan Zittrain, co-founder of Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet & Society and an author of a recent study on internet censorship in China. "It's one thing to provide a regime with steel, another to provide bullets, and another to serve as the executioner."

Executives with the Redmond, Wash.-based software giant argue that they are only following local laws and any disadvantage is outweighed by benefits users get from the company's services.

* * * * * * *

[LW: Of course, the same might have been said about the use of IBM equipment by the Nazi regime to facilitate the holocaust -- "any disadvantage is outweighed by benefits users get from the company's services."]

Downing Street memo and other evidence that the Iraq War was based on bogus intelligence and political deceit

While the US Congress, the media and the general public remain oblivious, the British press and bloggers have done fine job shining a light on documentary evidence of what amounts to the greatest political fraud in American history. The best complilation can be found at Think Progress.

How much longer will people simply nod, smile, wave the flag, and look the other way? (The evidence mounts that the 9/11 attack left America without a central nervous system.)

Profiles in cowardice: Senators who did not co-sponsor the resolution apologizing for not passing anti-lynching laws

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Thad Cochran (R-MS)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Michael Crapo (R-ID)
Michael Enzi (R-WY)
Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Judd Gregg (R-NH)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Kay Hutchison (R-TX)
Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
Trent Lott (R-MS)
Richard Shelby (R-AL)
John Sununu (R-NH)
Craig Thomas (R-WY)

Evidently, majority leader Bill Frist was the one who bravely refused to hold a roll call vote on the resolution, shielding the above group from having to vote publicly by name. The resolution was adopted by "unanimous consent."

What a group.

Dinosaurs on Noah's Ark?

To keep America safe from the theory of evolution and yet explain the embarrassing presence of ancient fossils, including dinosaur fossils, the creationists have arrived at an amusing re-telling of the story of Noah's ark.

"Why Do We Find Dinosaur Fossils?

In Genesis 6, we read that all flesh (man and animals) had 'corrupted his way upon the Earth' (Genesis 6:12). Perhaps people and animals were killing each other; maybe dinosaurs had started killing other animals and humans. In any case, the Bible describes the world as 'wicked.'

Because of this wickedness, God warned a godly man named Noah that He was going to destroy the world with a Flood (Genesis 6:13). God therefore commanded him to build a great ship (the Ark) so that all the kinds of land animals (which must have included dinosaurs) and Noah's family could survive on board while the Flood destroyed the entire Earth (Genesis 6:14-20). . . . .

God sent two of every (seven of some) land animal into the Ark (Genesis 7:2-3; 7:8-9)—there were no exceptions. Therefore, dinosaurs must have been on the Ark. Even though there was ample room in the huge ship for large animals, perhaps God sent young adults into the Ark that still had plenty of room for them to grow."

* * * * * *

It is too bad that since Yahoo has become the name for a web site, no one remembers Jonathan Swift's original designation for "Yahoo" in Gulliver's Travels. Evidently a lot of these creatures survived the flood as well.

When foxes run the hen house (greenhouse): a familiar Bush Administration tale

A NYT story, "Bush Aide Softened Greenhouse Gas Links to Global Warming," gives yet more evidence of the what passes for "science" policy advice in the puritan plutocracy of George W. Bush.

A White House official who once led the oil industry's fight against limits on greenhouse gases has repeatedly edited government climate reports in ways that play down links between such emissions and global warming, according to internal documents.

In handwritten notes on drafts of several reports issued in 2002 and 2003, the official, Philip A. Cooney, removed or adjusted descriptions of climate research that government scientists and their supervisors, including some senior Bush administration officials, had already approved. In many cases, the changes appeared in the final reports.

The dozens of changes, while sometimes as subtle as the insertion of the phrase "significant and fundamental" before the word "uncertainties," tend to produce an air of doubt about findings that most climate experts say are robust.

Mr. Cooney is chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the office that helps devise and promote administration policies on environmental issues. . . . .


* * * * * * * * * *

A good sign of a failing city or failing society: when people take out more than they put in. That seems consistently characteristic of the Bushies approach. - LW

"Grocery Store Wars" -- 0rganic food video satire

The Organic Trade Association has released an amusing satire, "Grocery Store Wars," that pits a cast of virtuous, organic vegetable characters against chemicalized figures from the "dark side of the farm."




An earlier video by the same animators, "The Meatrix," is also a hoot.

No clear purpose for the "war on terror" -- Army War College states the obvious

An interesting report by Stephen D. Biddle of the Army War College points to the quagmire in Iraq and the total lack of purpose exhibited in U.S. policy making about the "war on terror."


American Grand Strategy After 9/11: An Assessment

Synopsis:

In the three years since 9-11, the Administration has yet to arrive at a clear definition of the enemy or the aim in the War on Terrorism; to date, American policy has combined ambitious public statements with ambiguity on critical particulars. Heretofore, the costs of pursuing such ambitious but ill-defined goals have been high but tolerable. The ongoing insurgency in Iraq, however, is increasing the costs of grand strategic ambiguity to the point where fundamental choices can no longer be deferred. There are two broad alternatives for resolving these ambiguities and creating a coherent and logically sufficient grand strategy: rollback and containment. Rollback would retain the ambitious goals implicit in today’s declaratory policy and accept the cost and near-term risk inherent in pursuing them. Containment would settle for more modest goals in exchange for lower costs and lower near-term risks. Neither alternative dominates the other on analytical grounds – both involve serious costs as well as benefits. Most important, the choice between them turns on a series of basic value judgments on the acceptability of risk, the relationship between near-term and long-term risk, and the ultimate degree of security the Nation should seek.

Dancing in the streets of Hudson: a victory for democracy, community and environment in the Hudson Valley:
the stunning defeat of Saint Lawrence Cement’s Greenport Project

During the past six years I have joined thousands of friends and neighbors in Columbia County and the surrounding region in a tooth and nail fight against a proposal by Saint Lawrence Cement and its Swiss owned holding company, Holcim, to build a huge, $350 million coal fired cement plant near the city of Hudson in New York. Recently the state of New York weighed in, denying permits required for the building of this monstrosity. Now the company itself has pulled the plug, deciding not to appeal the decision.

When the plant was first announced in 1998 many people bought the company’s line that it was “a done deal” and “inevitable.” Fortunately, a small number of people, then a middle sized number and eventually many thousands replied: “Done deal? Who the hell says?” They gathered their forces, formed a strategy, raised money, attended hearings, held fund raisers, put up yard signs, talked to anyone who would listen, and, in general, did everything necessary to build a broad base of support and to put forth a reasonable message: the economy and environment of this region are already moving in a strong, prosperous “green” direction and would be seriously harmed by the building of the outsized, heavily polluting factory.

Soon I’ll write my thoughts here about this wonderful development and how it came to be. Basically, this has been the best conceived, best spirited and most effective social movement I’ve known. For now, I’ll simply post excerpts from two key stories – St. Lawrence Cement's press release on it’s decision to quit and last week’s decision by New York Secretary of State Randy Daniels, denying the company permits needed to for the project. The NYS decision is well worth reading, a strongly argued position that essentially endorses what Friends of Hudson and other groups have been saying all along.

Join the celebration!!!!

* * * * * * *

[Press release, today]

St. Lawrence Cement Withdraws from Permitting Process in Greenport, New York

Hudson, NY, April 24, 2005 - In 1998, St. Lawrence Cement embarked on the permitting process to build a two-million tonne cement plant in Greenport, New York. The US$353 million plant aimed at replacing its cement plant presently in operation in nearby Catskill and securing the additional capacity to replace offshore imports.

Altogether, 17 federal, state and local permits and approvals were needed before construction could begin. Among the required permits, the New York State Department of State (DOS) certification was key to qualify for other approvals. On April 19, 2005, St. Lawrence Cement received a negative determination from the DOS, which ruled that the proposed plant was inconsistent with the state’s Coastal Zone Policies. The project’s configuration, size and location, as proposed, would affect the state’s coastal areas in a manner which is inconsistent with the state’s coastal policies.

Following careful review of the impacts of the DOS decision, the Board of Directors of St. Lawrence Cement has decided not to appeal the DOS decision and to withdraw the proposed replacement cement plant in Greenport, New York, from the permitting process.

‘’I wish to sincerely thank our supporters for their continuous encouragement in this undertaking and our employees who dedicated their efforts to move this project forward,’’ said Philippe Arto, President and CEO of St. Lawrence Cement.

* * * * * * *

Albany Times Union

State rejects $350M cement plant, port
St. Lawrence proposal called detrimental to Hudson, Athens

By BRUCE A. SCRUTON, Staff writer
First published: Wednesday, April 20, 2005
ALBANY -- The state secretary of state has sunk plans for a multimillion-dollar cement plant and shipping port on the shores of the Hudson River, saying the project would ruin the economic rebound of Hudson and Athens.

The decision was released to St. Lawrence Cement Co., and some interested parties, after the close of business Tuesday. A copy of the 20-page decision was provided to the Times Union by Friends of Hudson, which opposed the project.

Daniel Odescalchi, a spokesman for St. Lawrence, said, "We're obviously disappointed" with the decision but noted "we do need to review this decision in detail" before deciding what to do next.

The Canadian-based company's options appear to be: drop the project, in which they have already invested about five years and $56 million; appeal the decision to the federal Department of Commerce; or address the concerns by submitting a retooled proposal.

But the language in the decision from Secretary of State Randy A. Daniels makes it clear there is little hope of getting a Hudson waterfront project approved.

"Rather than revitalize the waterfront, at its proposed scale, this shipping complex will dominate this and surrounding waterfront areas for the 50-60 year useful life of the industrial complex," Daniels wrote.

Because the Hudson River, up to Albany, is affected by tides, it is considered coastal and falls under federal regulations. The Department of Commerce has given states with coastlines the power to set management policies and have approval over projects on those shores.

Daniels said the project violates eight of the state's management policies, which cover areas such as visual impact, economic impact, noise levels and quality of life.

. . . .

Are things getting better? -- the idea of progress reconsidered

Which criteria would one use to decide? Which kinds of evidence? Which arguments could be offered to make a persuasive case?

The BBC takes note of a survey of scientists that finds future prospects rather dim.

"The most comprehensive survey ever into the state of the planet concludes that human activities threaten the Earth's ability to sustain future generations.

The report says the way society obtains its resources has caused irreversible changes that are degrading the natural processes that support life on Earth.

This will compromise efforts to address hunger, poverty and improve healthcare.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) was drawn up by 1,300 researchers from 95 nations over four years."

Scientific American yields to Creationist/Intelligent Design pressures?

A tongue-in-cheek editorial in the current Scientific American delivers a smashing critique of the blather about “balance” that is now the battering ram of the anti-science, creationist, fundamentalist forces now pressuring schools, textbook publishers, and anyone else gullible enough to take this propaganda campaign seriously.

Here’s a section from the magazine’s web page:

Okay, we give up
April 2005, by Staff Editor

There's no easy way to admit this. For years, helpful letter writers told us to stick to science. They pointed out that science and politics don't mix. They said we should be more balanced in our presentation of such issues as creationism, missile defense and global warming. We resisted their advice and pretended not to be stung by the accusations that the magazine should be renamed Unscientific American, or Scientific Unamerican, or even Unscientific Unamerican. But spring is in the air, and all of nature is turning over a new leaf, so there's no better time to say: you were right, and we were wrong.

In retrospect, this magazine's coverage of so-called evolution has been hideously one-sided. For decades, we published articles in every issue that endorsed the ideas of Charles Darwin and his cronies. True, the theory of common descent through natural selection has been called the unifying concept for all of biology and one of the greatest scientific ideas of all time, but that was no excuse to be fanatics about it. Where were the answering articles presenting the powerful case for scientific creationism? Why were we so unwilling to suggest that dinosaurs lived 6,000 years ago or that a cataclysmic flood carved the Grand Canyon? Blame the scientists. They dazzled us with their fancy fossils, their radiocarbon dating and their tens of thousands of peer-reviewed journal articles. As editors, we had no business being persuaded by mountains of evidence.

. . . . This magazine will be dedicated purely to science, fair and balanced science, and not just the science that scientists say is science. And it will start on April Fools' Day.

* * * * * *

The whole editorial can be found (purchased) at the Scientific American web site. It’s also on the web here and there.

Godel’s lost proof – authoritarian government in America?

A wonderful essay, “Time Bandits” by Jim Holt in a recent New Yorker, describes the friendship of Albert Einstein and Kurt Godel. Both men had fled Nazi Germany and in the 1940s had taken positions in Princeton University’s Center for Advanced Study. Godel was a logician and mathematician famous for his “incompleteness theorem.” His mind was especially good at ferreting out the deeper structural implications of abstract symbol systems. An amusing use of of this talent came when he decided to become an American citizen and turned his logical gaze to the U.S. Constitution. As Holt tells the story....

"So naïve and otherworldly was the great logician that Einstein felt obliged to help look after the practical aspects of his life. One much retailed story concerns Gödel’s decision after the war to become an American citizen. The character witnesses at his hearing were to be Einstein and Oskar Morgenstern, one of the founders of game theory. Gödel took the matter of citizenship with great solemnity, preparing for the exam by making a close study of the United States Constitution. On the eve of the hearing, he called Morgenstern in an agitated state, saying he had found an “inconsistency” in the Constitution, one that could allow a dictatorship to arise. Morgenstern was amused, but he realized that Gödel was serious and urged him not to mention it to the judge, fearing that it would jeopardize Gödel’s citizenship bid. On the short drive to Trenton the next day, with Morgenstern serving as chauffeur, Einstein tried to distract Gödel with jokes. When they arrived at the courthouse, the judge was impressed by Gödel’s eminent witnesses, and he invited the trio into his chambers. After some small talk, he said to Gödel, “Up to now you have held German citizenship.”

No, Gödel corrected, Austrian.

“In any case, it was under an evil dictatorship,” the judge continued. “Fortunately that’s not possible in America.”

“On the contrary, I can prove it is possible!” Gödel exclaimed, and he began describing the constitutional loophole he had descried. But the judge told the examinee that “he needn’t go into that,” and Einstein and Morgenstern succeeded in quieting him down. A few months later, Gödel took his oath of citizenship."

* * * * * * * * * * *

What was the "loophole" that Godel detected? I do not know and Holt's article does not say. One can surmise that Godel noticed what we are now living through, the consequences that befall the republic when all three branches of government are controlled by one political party. If Godel expected that this flaw in the Constitution might foster an authoritarian government with features similar to those of Nazi Germany, his insight was prophetic.

Ostrich replaces eagle as national bird

Around the globe the U.S.A. is fast becoming known as the nation
that habitually avoids confronting important social and environmental
problems. In both domestic policy and international negotiations,
George W. Bush and his neoconservative advisors simply bury their
heads in the sand, bringing along any politicians, journalists and (when
possible) scientists willing to be steamrolled. The same belief
that ideologically based positive thinking and evangelical cant will
overcome all problems – e.g. global warming, justifications for the war
in Iraq, abstinence propaganda in the schools – is now evident in
the government’s position on mercury pollution. An editorial in the L.A.
Times, “What Mercury Problem?” shows how thoroughly out of touch
the administration has become on this crucial problem. Evidently, it is
better to boost business profits than to protect the health of the
nation’s and world’s populace.

“In advance of a United Nations meeting on mercury pollution in Nairobi
that opens Feb. 21, the European Union is vowing to close its one
mercury mine, in Almaden, Spain, by far the biggest in the world, and
store existing mercury rather than sell it on the global market. The EU
also is open to a global treaty.

Documents submitted by the U.S. government, meanwhile, present no
specific goals or steps, reject the idea of a treaty, call vaguely for
voluntary partnerships, and offer to teach others about "best practices."
That's a curious phrase coming from the nation just criticized by its own
Environmental Protection Agency inspector general for violating
scientific procedures in order to come up with an industry-friendly
regulation of coal plants, probably the biggest source of mercury
emissions in this country.”

(Let the ostrich soar!)

How to ruin a perfectly good "brand" -- America

A survey by the GMI World Poll find growing "anti-American sentiment"
among international consumers, evidently a reflection of result of disdain
for Bush administration foreign policies. This feeling "negatively
impacts U.S. multinational companies closely branded as American."

I doubt that the arrogant central players in the White House took
this backlash into account as they laid their plans for "New! Improved!
Preemptive Strike!"

Here's the story.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Seattle, Washington -- December 27, 2004

American multinational companies will need to mount a valiant effort to
distance themselves from the image of the U.S. federal government and
its unpopular foreign policies in the New Year or risk continued brand
erosion and ongoing boycotting by European and Canadian consumers,
according to independent market research solutions company GMI, Inc.
(http://www.worldpoll.com).

The GMI World Poll conducted an 8,000 international consumer survey
on America’s image abroad, U.S. foreign policy and American
multinational brands on Dec. 10 through 12 (representative samples of
1,000 consumers in each of eight countries: Canada, China, France,
Germany, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom and United States). The study
found that 1/3 of the 8,000 international consumers stated that
American foreign policy, including the war on terror and the war in Iraq,
most influenced their image of America; only 17% indicated that
American movies and music most influenced their image. Furthermore,
79% of European and Canadian consumers distrust the American
government, 50% distrust American companies, and 39% distrust the
American people.

When European and Canadian consumers were asked to characterize the
American government and President Bush, they were most often
described as arrogant and self-centered; UN Secretary General Kofi
Annan was characterized as conventional and reserved. With this in
mind, when consumers were asked to characterize American
multinational brands, the data revealed select American multinational
company’s - AOL, Exxon Mobil and Starbucks - were viewed very much
like the American government and President Bush: arrogant, intrusive
and self-centered.

According to the study, these multinational American companies were
also among the top brands most likely to be boycotted; in keeping with
polls from the past three months, GMI World Poll found that 20% of
European and Canadian consumers reported that they consciously avoid
American products because of recent American foreign policy and
military action.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Alas, the nation's leaders tend to take much for granted, especially the
amount of good will the USA has around the world. Right now that
"human capital" is running perilously thin.

Today's riddle: How is the U.S. Missile Defense Shield
different from a high school football team?

Answer #1: The shield doesn't operate in the rain.

From Reuters comes the story (about the shield, not the football team):

12/10/04
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The first flight test in nearly two years of a
planned U.S. missile-defense shield has been scrapped two days in a row
this week because of bad weather, the Pentagon said on Friday.

Strong rain squalls over the Kwajalein atoll launch site in the central
Pacific caused the latest postponement, Richard Lehner, a spokesman
for the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency, said shortly after the decision
to scrap the test. A new attempt might be made later in the day, he said.

***************
Answer #2: The football team occasionally intercepts something.

When the skies cleared and the test finally happened, the interceptor failed to launch.

From the New York Times (12/16/04):

WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - An important test of the United States'
fledgling missile defense system ended in failure early Wednesday as an
interceptor rocket failed to launch on cue from the Marshall Islands, the
Pentagon said.

After a rocket carrying a mock warhead as a target was launched from
Kodiak, Alaska, the interceptor, which was intended to go aloft 16
minutes later and home in on the target 100 miles over the earth,
automatically shut down because of "an unknown anomaly," according
to the Missile Defense Agency of the Defense Department.

********************
Answer #3: The football team recognizes failures and adapts its strategy.

Also from the NY Times story:

But a spokesman for Senator John Kyl, Republican of Arizona, a strong
advocate of the program, said "one bum test" would not alter support for
it.

Indeed, despite a series of delays in testing this year, Congress has
embraced the deployment of a rudimentary system, which is favored by
those who want to field even a limited system sooner rather than later.

Outsourcing the C.E.O.? -- high tech rumor

The following press release has been circulating in Silicon Valley and
other high tech communities. Probably scheduled for 4/1/05 release, it's
here it time for holiday cheer.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Subject: Outsourcing update

Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ)

News Flash: PALO ALTO. Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ) today
announced that the Office ofPresident, CEO and Chairman will be
outsourced as of December 31, the end of the fiscal year. The move is
being made to save $45 million in annual salary and benefits. Further
savings in air travel are expected to add to HP's bottom line. "At the end
of the day, the cost savings will be quite significant" says HP board
member, Executive Vice President, and CFO Rob Highwayman, who,
with the aid of HP's outsourcing arm, HP Services, has studied
outsourcing extensively. "We simply can no longer afford this inefficiency
and remain competitive in the world stage," Highwayman said. Sanji
Gurvinder Singh, 23, of Indus Teleservices, Mumbai, India, will be
assuming the Office of President, Chairman and CEO as of November 1.
He will receive a salary of $320 USD a month with proportionate
benefits. Mr. Singh will maintain his office in India andwill be working
primarily at night, due to the time difference between the US and India.
"I am excited to serve in this position," Mr. Singh stated in an exclusive
interview. "I always knew that my career at the HP call center would lead
to great things."

An HP spokesperson noted that Mr. Singh has extensive
experience inpublic speaking and has been given Ms. Fiorina's script tree
to enable him to answer any question without having to understand the
issue.Ms. Fiorina, 49, has announced that she will join the faculty of
theStanford School of Business, specializing in medieval business and the
related subject of employee motivation. No one at the Stanford School of
Business was available for comment.

The Hewlett-Packard board continues to explore other
outsourcing possibilities including HP's more than 1,200 vice
presidents. In an unrelated news item it was learned that HP was selling
five corporate jets complete with passengers thought to be board
members and HP executives. While the value of the content was not
thought to be significant it is believed that their accumulated air-miles
could be used to facilitate additional outsourcing initiatives.

St. Lawrence Cement named to prestigious "Dirty Dozen" list

It's always good to see a local company gain recognition for
the work they do. Here's the story from the Berkshire Eagle.

THE BERKSHIRE EAGLE
6 December 2004

Proposed N.Y. cement plant makes Dirty Dozen' roster

WALTHAM -- Citing health hazards to New England states from what
would be one of the nation's largest coal-fired cement plants, the New
England-based environmental group Toxics Action Center has presented
Holcim Ltd.'s U.S. headquarters with a 2004 Dirty Dozen Award.
The Switzerland-based Holcim is one of the world's leading cement
producers. Its subsidiary, St. Lawrence Cement, is seeking to build a
massive cement plant in Greenport, N.Y., less than 16 miles west of the
Massachusetts border. The plant would burn an estimated 500 million
pounds of coal annually.

"A polluting plant of this size could not obtain permits in Holcim's
home country of Switzerland," said Sam Pratt, executive director of
Friends of Hudson, a 4,000-member organization in New York that is
opposed to the project, in a press release. "Why should a Holcim
subsidiary be allowed to threaten our health here in New England?"
More than 35 other groups and agencies, from the Berkshire Regional
Planning Commission to the American Lung Association, have expressed
strong concerns about the coal-fired facility. Former Maine Gov. Angus
King and Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal have
expressed firm opposition to the proposal.

"The track record of St. Lawrence Cement and its parent company,
Holcim, is suspect, at best," said state Sen. Andrea F. Nuciforo Jr.,
D-Pittsfield. "The proposed St. Lawrence Cement Plant, just over the
border in New York, could have significant impacts to our environment
and quality of life in Western Massachusetts."

Prevailing winds and the height of the plant's proposed stack -- some
36 stories tall, sited on a small mountain -- would send pollutants
such as lead, arsenic, mercury, carbon monoxide, greenhouse gases and
fine particulates eastward to New England, say opponents, as well as
nitrogen oxide emissions, responsible for soot and smog.

"If all that pollution heads our way, it will wipe out a lot of the
gains New Englanders have made in air-quality improvements," said
Eleanor Tillinghast, president of Green Berkshires Inc., an
environmental group.

Nathaniel W. Karns, executive director of the Berkshire Regional
Planning Commission, added, "The Berkshire Regional Planning
Commission remains very concerned about the considerable increase in
air pollution we would experience from a much larger St. Lawrence
Cement Plant. ...

The fact that the commonwealth of Massachusetts was not allowed to
participate in the New York environmental review of this project only
heightens our level of concern."

The eighth annual Dirty Dozen Awards spotlight 12 of New England's top
polluters as selected from a set of nominations by a 15-member panel of
environmental and public health professionals.

TV journalists revolt, refuse to parrot government line!
(but only in the Ukraine)

Imagine what would happen if this spread to the United States?

From the B.B.C., "Ukraine state TV in revolt" --

Journalists on Ukraine's state-owned channel - which had previously
given unswerving support to Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych - have
joined the opposition, saying they have had enough of "telling the
government's lies".

Journalists on another strongly pro-government TV station have also
promised an end to the bias in their reporting. The turnaround in news
coverage, after years of toeing the government line, is a big setback for
Mr Yanukovych.

Journalists in Ukraine seem to have responded to the call by opposition
leader Viktor Yushchenko for them to reject government censorship.

A correspondent on the state channel, UT1, announced live on the
evening bulletin that the entire news team was going to join the protests
in Independence Square. She said their message to the protesters was:
"We are not lying anymore".

Does the atrocity of 9/11 justify endless atrocities in response?

The Lancet study (noted here previously) estimates there have been
100,000 Iraqi casualties since the beginning of the war in Iraq. While
the exact figures are debatable, the experts in public health who
conducted the research seem to be on solid ground. When I ask college
students and ordinary American folks about this slaughter, including the
recent leveling of Falluja, some are sickened or outraged. But a
surprising number of people say something like this: “After what they
did to us on 9/11, America can’t be criticized for hitting back!”

Of course the “they” in emphatics sentences of this kind is most peculiar.
Evidently, any brown skinned Muslim can be counted in this category.
Oh, please don’t bother us with the details. We don’t need to know the
names of the women and children or even the numbers of those killed.
America’s lapdog press, including the New York Times and Washington
Post, helps out here by suggesting that all civilians killed in Iraq are
“insurgents” and not mentioning anyone else. If you’re dead, you were an
insurgent. The logic here is stunning and its moral implications
deadening to heart and soul. Now the war comes home (as it always
does) and begins to infect our national character. The idea that the
violence is
“over there" and not "right here at home" is badly mistaken,
a lesson that will take decades to unfold.

Two recent pieces are well worth anyone’s reading. One is a brief essay
by Jeffrey Sachs, professor of economics at Columbia University, “Iraq's
civilian dead get no hearing in the United States.” As Sachs observes,

“The U.S. is killing massive numbers of Iraqi civilians, embittering the
population and many in the Islamic world, and laying the ground for
escalating violence and death. No number of slaughtered Iraqis will
bring peace. The American fantasy of a final battle, in Fallujah or
elsewhere, or the capture of some terrorist mastermind, perpetuates a
cycle of bloodletting that puts the world in peril.

Worse still, American public opinion, media, and the recent election
victory of the Bush administration have left the world's most powerful
military without practical restraint.”

At an even deeper level of reflection is Chris Hedges piece in the New
York Review of books. Hedges is a former war correspondent whose
book, War is a Force that Gives Life Meaning, describes the hideous
attractions of war and their implications for any society, including the
U.S.A., that embraces war as central to its a way of life. (See Chalmer
Johnson’s The Sorrows of Empire for further details). Hedges writes:


“Those who cover war dine out on the myth about war and the myth
about themselves as war correspondents. Yes, they say, it is horrible, and
dirty and ugly; for many of them it is also glamorous and exciting and
empowering. They look out from the windows of Humvees for a few
seconds at Iraqi families, cowering in fear, and only rarely see the effects
of the firepower. When they are forced to examine what bullets,
grenades, and shells do to human bodies they turn away in disgust or
resort to black humor to dehumanize the corpses. They cannot stay long,
in any event, since they must leave the depressing scene behind for the
next mission. The tragedy is replaced, as it is for us at home who watch it
on television screens, by a light moment or another story. It becomes
easier to forget that another human life has been ruined beyond repair,
that what is unfolding is not only tragic for tens of thousands of Iraqis but
for the United States.”

Crackdown coming?

Writing in the journal Conservation Biology recently, I called attention to
a looming conflict. Here's a segment from the article, "Science Policy for True Believers,"

"American society is now engaged in a range of policy debates in which
standards of critical thinking and public debate are often sacrificed to
crass calculations about who wins and who loses. In this process, many
who hold power in government and business are strongly attracted to
patterns of thinking and talking more compatible with classic “closed
societies” than with open, democratic political systems. The underlying
sentiment is all-too-clear: Just win, regardless of cost. Partisans of this
insurgence feel compelled to promote corporate interests, “conservative”
social agendas and unilateralist foreign policy objectives, even when
prominent scientific findings cast doubt on the wisdom of actions favored
within the prevailing groupthink.

Attempts to dominate the content of information and ideas in ways that
advance a particular agenda to the exclusion of all others -- such
projects are evident in many key domains of social life. A notorious
example is the almost total absorption of AM radio by right wing talk
show hosts who harangue national audiences with uniform, angry talking
points hour after hour, cutting off callers who dare offer any different
views. Much the same influence is visible on cable television news and
news/talk programs in which the spectrum of opinions voiced has
recently narrowed to include only the hand picked “moderate” and
“conservative” voices favored by corporate media managers.
Widespread public unrest about these developments is evident in the
protests about relaxation of government regulations governing the
concentration of media ownership. The increasing uniformity of cable
news and news/talk programming, the penchant for cleansing discussion
of annoying dissent, looms as a major problem for the long term health
of our democracy.

Now science itself looms as a convenient target, just another
communications channel ready to be adapted to the dictates of a rapidly
moving, power-hungry social movement. Will scientists and scholars
yield to this aggressive onslaught, taking their research grants and laying
low? Or can we hope for a more positive, more hopeful, more forceful
response?

[Conservation Biology, Page 866, vol. 18, no. 4, Aug. 2004]

My expectation has been that a Bush victory would lead to further steps
in the ongoing attempt to establish a hegemony of message content at all
levels of American society. Just before the election, I predicted to my
class of first years students in an American politics class that there
would be "a crackdown on dissidents in major institutions." I was
thinking of NPR, PBS, and the country's colleges and universities, for
starters.

Now we see the first wave of hand wringing and argument that could lead
to the ideological cleansing that, I believe, is near the top of the
far right "conservative" agenda. George Will's article, "Academia, Stuck
to the Left," begins to lay out the case.

"Academics, such as the next secretary of state, still decorate
Washington, but academia is less listened to than it was. It has
marginalized itself, partly by political shrillness and silliness that have
something to do with the parochialism produced by what George Orwell
called "smelly little orthodoxies."

Many campuses are intellectual versions of one-party nations -- except
such nations usually have the merit, such as it is, of candor about their
ideological monopolies. In contrast, American campuses have more
insistently proclaimed their commitment to diversity as they have
become more intellectually monochrome.

They do indeed cultivate diversity -- in race, skin color, ethnicity, sexual
preference. In everything but thought."

* * * * * * * * *
Wills' claims are both ludicrous and pernicious. The best, extended
critique I've read is one by Juan Cole, historian at the University of
Michigan. He begins with the allegation that universities have few
conservatives in teaching positions.

"There are all sorts of social-science problems with this allegation. First,
what is the population that is being studied? Is it all tenure-track
teachers in all universities in all schools and departments? Are we
including two-year colleges? Four-year ones? Are we including
Economics Departments, Business Schools, Medical Schools,
Engineering schools?

If that were the pool, then academics probably mirror the general
American society pretty closely. There are about 1.1 million post-
secondary teachers in the United States. A lot of the ones in the Red
States are conservatives, and a lot of the ones in the engineering schools
everywhere are. So it simply is not true that "universities" are bastions of
the political left. Moreover, there are almost no leftists in any major
economics department in the United States, in contrast to Europe."

Cole's piece runs in his blog, Informed Comment, 11/28/04 (in the archives).

Coming to a campus near you: the thought police.

Note that in my comments above I've put "conservative" in quotation
marks. When I run into people who tell me they are conservative these
days I say, "Oh, that's interesting. What are you conservering?"
Embarrassing moments of silence usually follow.

Best estimate of civilian casualties due to the Iraq war -- 100.000

A Reuters summary of a recent report from The John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
contains some especially dreary, but not unexpected news. Other figures I've read now count from
13.000 to 15,000 plus Iraqi casualties in the war. The Hopkins study looks at "excess deaths" over
an eighteen month period, concluding that 100,000 is a reasonable estimate. These figures and the
human realities behind them are simply tragic.

Our national tendency is, of course, to ignore such data in favor of triumphalist high patriotism.
Even publicizing the number of American troops killed in combat (now well over 1,100) is
considered suspect. In the little village of Chatham, New York, near where I live, the mayor ordered
removal of a billboard and small yellow flags memorial that gave daily updates on deaths of U.S. soldiers.

Which of these deaths -- American, Iraqi, and others -- should we remember, mourn and honor?
If the answer is not "All of them," I'd like to know the reason why.

Jobs for U.S. programmers evaporate

During the presidential debates G.W. Bush held out the promise of community
college education for those who had lost jobs to foreign competition.
Remedies of this kind have long been preferred by American politicians and
businessmen, mainly because it places responsibility for economic pain on individuals,
(the victims) and deflects attention from more basic structural causes. Just upgrade
your skills, folks. Maybe become a computer programer rather than a factory
worker and you'll be fine. What such arguments overlook, of course, is that
the competition U.S. workers now face extends to job categories across a broad
spectrum, including what are often taken to be fairly sophisticated technical
vocations.

Here's a story, "Endangered Species," by David Francis of the Christian Science
Monitor about the jobs in question.

"Say goodbye to the American software programmer. Once the symbols of hope
as the nation shifted from manufacturing to service jobs, programmers today
are an endangered species. They face a challenge similar to that which shrank
the ranks of steelworkers and autoworkers a quarter century ago: competition
from foreigners. ....

"Since the dotcom bust in 2000-2001, nearly a quarter of California technology
workers have taken nontech jobs, according to a study of 1 million workers
released last week by Sphere Institute, a San Francisco Bay Area public policy
group. The jobs they took often paid less. Software workers were hit especially
hard. Another 28% have dropped off California's job rolls altogether. They fled
the state, became unemployed, or decided on self-employment. ....

"Although computer-related jobs in the United States increased by 27,000 between
2001 and 2003, about 180,000 new foreign H-1B workers in the computer
area entered the nation, calculates John Miano, an expert with the Programmers
Guild, a professional society. "This suggests any gain of jobs have been taken by
H-1B workers," he says.

"H-1B visas allow skilled foreigners to live and work in the US for up to six
years. Many are able to get green cards in a first step to citizenship. Another visa,
L-1, allows multinational companies to transfer workers from foreign operations
into the US. ....

"H-1B and L-1 visas are "American worker replacement programs," says the
National Hire American Citizens Society."

Science labs for Iraqi insurgents

A little noticed a feature of the report released last week by CIA
weapons inspector Charles Duelfer finds increasing activity by
post-Saddam Iraqi insurgents interested in creatings, oops, weapons
of mass destruction. Evidently, this intense quest for WMDs was
inspired the U.S. occupation of the county (who would have
guessed?). From the SF Chronicle story on the matter:

"Insurgent networks across Iraq are increasingly trying to acquire
and use toxic nerve gases, blister agents and germ weapons against
U.S. and coalition forces, according to a CIA report, and investigators
said one group recruited scientists and sought to prepare poisons
over seven months before it was dismantled in June.

U.S. officials say the threat is especially worrisome because leaders of
the previously unknown group, which investigators called the "Al Abud
network, " were based in Fallujah in proximity to insurgents aligned with
fugitive militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The CIA says Zarqawi, who is
blamed for numerous attacks on U.S. forces and beheadings of hostages,
has long sought to use chemical and biological weapons against targets in
Europe as well as Iraq.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

"To practice democracy? Are you kidding?" -- eye witness Baghdad

An unsettling picture of the situation on the ground in Iraq, the most telling I've
read recently, comes in an email from Wall Street Journal reporter Farnaz Fassihi.
Most of the U.S. press, including Fassihi's own paper, refuses to describe the
situation in this level of detail, preferring administration propaganda about the
puppet regime and coming elections.

"Being a foreign correspondent in Baghdad these days is like being under virtual
house arrest. Forget about the reasons that lured me to this job: a chance to
see the world, explore the exotic, meet new people in far away lands, discover their
ways and tell stories that could make a difference.

Little by little, day-by-day, being based in Iraq has defied all those reasons.
I am house bound. I leave when I have a very good reason to and a scheduled
interview. I avoid going to people's homes and never walk in the streets. I can't
go grocery shopping any more, can't eat in restaurants, can't strike a conversation
with strangers, can't look for stories, can't drive in any thing but a full armored
car, can't go to scenes of breaking news stories, can't be stuck in traffic, can't
speak English outside, can't take a road trip, can't say I'm an American, can't
linger at checkpoints, can't be curious about what people are saying, doing, feeling.
And can't and can't. There has been one too many close calls, including a car bomb
so near our house that it blew out all the windows. So now my most pressing
concern every day is not to write a kick-ass story but to stay alive and make sure
our Iraqi employees stay alive. In Baghdad I am a security personnel first, a
reporter second.
. . . . . .
"Despite President Bush's rosy assessments, Iraq remains a disaster. If under
Saddam it was a 'potential' threat, under the Americans it has been transformed
to 'imminent and active threat,' a foreign policy failure bound to haunt the United States
for decades to come.

Iraqis like to call this mess 'the situation.' When asked 'how are thing?' they
reply: 'the situation is very bad."

What they mean by situation is this: the Iraqi government doesn't control most
Iraqi cities, there are several car bombs going off each day around the country
killing and injuring scores of innocent people, the country's roads are becoming
impassable and littered by hundreds of landmines and explosive devices aimed
to kill American soldiers, there are assassinations, kidnappings and beheadings.
The situation, basically, means a raging barbaric guerilla war. In four days,
110 people died and over 300 got injured in Baghdad alone. The numbers are
so shocking that the ministry of health -- which was attempting an exercise of
public transparency by releasing the numbers -- has now stopped disclosing them.
. . . . . .
"I asked a 28-year-old engineer if he and his family would participate in the Iraqi
since it was the first time Iraqis could to some degree elect a leadership. His
response summed it all: 'Go and vote and risk being blown into pieces or followed
by the insurgents and murdered for cooperating with the Americans? For what?
To practice democracy? Are you joking?'"