
Iraqi Policetophoto: Ahmad Al-Rubaye/AFP
-
A week before she was killed [...] humanitarian worker Marla Ruzicka forced military commanders to admit they did keep records of Iraqi civilians killed by US forces.

...But of these sophisms and elenchs of merchandise I skill not...
Milton, Areopagitica
Except he had found the
standing sea-rock that even this last
Temptation breaks on; quieter than death but lovelier; peace
that quiets the desire even of praising it.
Jeffers, Meditation On Saviors

still here 01:28
During the trial, Bushmen witnesses have given graphic accounts to the court of how they were forced off their land.
Losolobe Mogetse explained how he had argued with an official who came to evict him and was told he could not visit his dying father, Mogetse, who was already in a relocation camp, unless he agreed to relocate there permanently. He said he had no choice but to leave his land if he wished to see his father again.
Motsoko Ramafoko described the government's tactics to divide families."First they took our wives, loaded them in the trucks and off they went to New Xade. Then they came for us men... and forcefully removed us against our will." Tshokodiso Botshilwane described how he watched helplessly as officials dismantled his huts, but refused to leave the reserve, sleeping instead under a tree for many days. He declared, "I prefer death to relocation."
Mongwegi Thobogelo told the court that she would never apply for a permit to enter the reserve as it was the place of her birth.
"It was declared a reserve while we already lived there," she said. She recounted how Bushmen returning to their land have been harassed by government officials, and arrested for entering the reserve without a permit.
To escape deteriorating conditions in the relocation camps where prostitution, alcoholism and HIV/AIDS have all now taken hold, many Bushmen are returning to their lands in the reserve despite intimidation by game scouts and lack of water. One family returning home in November was denied water by game scouts when they broke down near the reserve entrance, and were forced to wait three days without water until they were rescued. People in the reserve are surviving by drinking water from wild tsama melons and pans (shallow depressions) where water occasionally collects, after their water borehole was destroyed by the government during the eviction.
still here 15:10
still here 14:49
still here 14:18
Two sad stories and an ugly one with a lot of sadness around it.
The things I miss by not reading metafilter and electrolite!
But then, the time I'd spend in those pursuits is occupied just the same; and with what, you wonder?
Speculations like these.
The executed killer in Chris Clarke's story may have taken the lives of thirty or more young women. If it was close to a hundred Clarke would have said a hundred in the piece. His story picks the killer's life up in 1981, as it intersects his.
Twenty-five years ago, more or less. Say the executed killer had taken the lives of a hundred young women, or say a thousand. Say he'd never been caught. Twenty-five years makes it forty a year. An appalling statistic.
Between forty-five and fifty thousand people die every year in the US in traffic "accidents". So in twenty-five years the street/highway body count's at one to one-and-a-quarter million souls cut loose and gone into the afterlife.
That doesn't bother people nearly as much as thirty or forty young women killed by one man. So we need to look at what the primary differences are, to understand why the one, while so much smaller in magnitude, is so much worse in malfeasance than the other; to see if that's an appropriate distinction, or a symptom of a deeper illness.
Is it the youth of the victims? Probably a little - certainly people would be angry and revulsed if the executed killer had been taking the lives of men over 90 - but just as certainly they wouldn't be quite as horrified at the idea.
Yet we see from the statistics of the National Transportation and Safety Board that traffic "accidents" are the single largest killer of people under thirty in the US today. Now that we've eradicated most of the really pernicious childhood diseases.
Is it the randomness of the victims? It's safe to say that most traffic "accident" mortalities are random, in the sense that while the causative drivers may be unfit for some reason, the "collateral damage" - the victims, the passengers and other drivers - often have no other fault than being where they were when the "accident" took place.
One of the first excitements that these statements generate is the blood-lust for "drunken drivers" that's been the only real reaction of the American people to these statistics, with the result that, coupled with the blindness to the scale of death the automobile is responsible for, most people have a vague and unfounded sense that most traffic "accidents" are a result of drunk driving.
That isn't borne out by the statistics, even when any measurable amount of blood-alcohol in any involved drivers means that particular "accident" will be termed "alcohol-related", whether or not the consumption of alcohol had anything to do with its cause. And we'll set aside for now the historical context for that distinction - people having been using alcohol for millennia, and driving cars for less than a hundred years.
So youth and randomness, while clearly being the cause of much of the outrage at the executed killer's toll on society, somehow don't make the bridge. Cars are not only not seen as murderous and deadly, they're the single largest industry in the US, the backbone of the economy, and with the oil industry as partner they are the economy. So there's that.
The one difference that's clear here is "intent". The law makes this distinction, making manslaughter a lesser crime than homicide. And people do as well.
So it isn't the outcome, the what - it's the why. Why is important, as far as justice goes, it's the single most important factor. And that's where all this breaks down as rational moral response and begins its fade into religion. Especially Judeo-Christian religion, with its emphases on intention and rules, and the corollaries that unintended consequences are not as serious as intended ones, and that actions not covered by the existing rules aren't wrong; conscious choice contrasted with unintended, unchosen outcomes. So that a mistake that results in the deaths of hundreds of people is not nearly as horrifying as an intended act that has the same results. Why?
Why are we willing to accept the random harvesting of innocent people on the highway, on a daily weekly monthly and yearly basis, simply because no one intends it? Because that's really the only difference, unless we have to accept the use of the internal combustion engine and the automobile as an inevitable thing, something we have to be doing, a step toward an as yet unnamed goal - and this mortality, the randomness of it, and the absolutely non-evolutionary selection of it, is like a tax, the price we have to pay to get there.
But then if we're going to look at this honestly, we have to bring in the costs we pay in addition to lives lost in traffic - the poisoned atmosphere of the places we live, the unsafe streets any bicyclist will testify to, and the disruption of the weather cycles whose balance we've depended on, and adapted to, for our entire history.
And the wars currently being waged on behalf of oil, and those planned for the months and years ahead.
It requires a mindlessness, an intentional blindness, to cope with, or an active submission to whatever would and is arranging human progress to go in this direction.
And again that fades into religion, especially Judeo-Christian religion. God is doing it. God has a plan, and wants only our obedience to that plan.
God wants us to drive cars, wants us to burn oil, wants us to destroy the web of life everywhere we find it, wants us to sacrifice our children for the ease and power of roaring engines and tons of steel that fly whole families across the land wrapped in armor and sitting down.
It seems unlikely to me, that a loving and wise God would want that, and it fits neatly into the traditional imagery of the devil - as a life-hating cunning bargainer who trades on individual selfish desires, and provides insidious and unexpected forms of damnation in return.
still here 16:37
Secretary [of State Condoleeza] Rice: "Good morning. Nearly three years ago, the members of the Quartet agreed to a roadmap for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. From the London conference in February to President Bush's meeting with Prime Minister Sharon this week, we have all worked to realize the vision of the roadmap: two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.
Today we take another important step to realize that vision. On behalf of all the members of the Quartet, I am announcing the appointment of a Special Envoy for Gaza Disengagement. We have an opportunity right now to help Israelis and Palestinians build trust with one another and achieve the peace and security they both desire. President Bush is determined to seize the opportunity to help both sides reach their goal.
The parties have shown good faith and political courage in recent months, but the obstacles before them remain substantial. Working for the cause of peace is the vital interest and moral duty of every free nation. Therefore, the United States, together with the United Nations, the European Union and the Russian Federation -- the Quartet -- are committed to making the difference for peace.
UN Secretary General Annan, EU High Representative Solana, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov and I all agree that we must seize the moment and secure the very best person available for this critical mission of Special Envoy for Gaza Disengagement. That is why we have agreed on one of the world's most skilled, experienced and dedicated public servants, Mr. James Wolfensohn, the President of the World Bank."
"Israel's military operations pertaining to the demolitions of thousands of homes in Rafah are reckless, and leave tens of thousands of people without a roof over their heads". Wolfensohn added that "As a Jew, I am ashamed of this kind of treatment of people".
Mr Wolfensohn also implied that as a result of the invasion of Rafah, Israel could expect little sympathy if it seeks to raise funds from international economic institutions to boost the country's ailing economy. "Israel's behavior is reckless," he said. "Approval for any Israeli request for assistance should not be expected."
still here 15:20
Top Archdiocese officials knew the extent of the clergy sexual abuse problem for many years before it became known to the public.
still here 00:34
still here 23:25

"It has been extremely overwhelming and at times, frightening. At one point today, we had so many press people surrounding us, pushing us. We found it extremely difficult to pass out our flyers, because of the swarm of media from all over the world. The rumor about us being 'escorted off' was not exactly true. We were actually escorted onto the property. Mostly, the Italian police were trying to keep the press away, because the press are not allowed in St. Peter's. The rumor about being arrested is also not true.
The Basilica was beautiful and breathtaking. But, it was absolutely devastating. It was just so, so sad knowing that at a time when we as survivors were showing our respect for the passing of the Pope, Cardinal Law was the lead celebrant over mass.
Some of the foreign press were asking "Isn't it enough that Cardinal Law apologized and stepped down in Boston? Why won't you leave him alone, and move on?
We tried to stress that it's not about forgiving Cardinal Law, or punishing Cardinal Law. It's about stopping the pain. Far too many victims, their families and other Catholics, are still suffering, largely because of Cardinal Law. His presence is still very, very painful to so many."

still here 18:59
"...The second provision requires the state wildlife agency (Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks) to provide receivers capable of receiving signals from the radio-tracking collars to a landowner or their designee, on request. This means livestock producers would have unprecedented access and knowledge of wolves' locations, allowing Montana's wolf packs to easily be wiped out. Just when the state has adopted a reasonable wolf management Plan that would conserve wolves into the future, this bill could devastate wolf populations.
[...]
the bill's third provision requires that the only funds that can be spent on the radio collars and receivers are the federal funds designated for wolf management purposes in the state. But estimated costs just to implement the provisions of House Bill 461 in its first year equal the annual cost estimated for wolf management in the state - which means it would bankrupt the wolf management fund, leaving no funds available for the active conservation of the species."
Defenders of Wildlife Wolves (no direct link)
-
Montana FW&P
still here 15:31
Just because it needs saying:
The First Amendment, or the constitutionally guaranteed right to Freedom of Speech, isn't given to anybody. It's already there. That's the point. It isn't a privilege, it's a right.
It gets taken away, but that's by assholes. Otherwise, if you leave it alone, it's going to be there.
It needs defending from assholes from time to time, and that's what made me write this - one too many times reading some smug apologist for the neo-fascists telling me how soldiers are fighting to secure my Freedom of Speech. The inference being any US soldiers now engaged in combat are defending me against people who want to take away my right to Freedom of Speech. If only they were.
Not that it doesn't happen - but the lines of battle aren't military. We're talking about speech. Soldiers can be and have been called upon to fight those who wish to curtail Freedom of Speech, but they can just as readily be deployed to take it away, and to defend those who take it away.
The front lines of defense for the First Amendment are located precisely where it's being attacked, where speech is being attacked, censored, blocked, denied. Those who defend the right to speak, especially of unpopular speakers saying unpopular things. That's who's defending Freedom of Speech, our right to speak freely. That's who's on the front line in that battle.
still here 02:48
We should remember what is written in Revelation (12:7, etc.) : "Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, but they were defeated and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world - he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.... And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown down to the earth, he pursued the woman", who was "dressed like the sun", from whom Jesus was born (it is very clear that we are also talking about the Most Holy Virgin Mary). When the dragon realized that his efforts had failed, "he went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus."
During a May 24, 1987, visit to the Sanctuary of Saint Michael the Archangel, John Paul II said, "The battle against the devil, which is the principal task of Saint Michael the archangel, is still being fought today, because the devil is still alive and active in the world. The evil that surrounds us today, the disorders that plague our society, man's inconsistency and brokenness, are not only the results of original sin, but also the result of Satan's pervasive and dark action."
The last sentence is a clear reference to God's condemnation of the serpent, in Genesis (3:15): "1 will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." Is Satan already in hell? When did the battle between angels and devils take place?
Modern communications enabled the Pope not only to lead but also to intervene in the affairs of local churches as never before. Archbishop Milingo of Lusaka found himself summoned to Rome and placed under virtual house arrest following complaints by his fellow bishops that his exorcisms contained an element of black magic; he became a permanent embarrassment, contracting a brief marriage to a Moonie in America before returning to obedience.
[...]
In Italy, the Pope's two political interventions, attempts to halt an abortion bill and to save the Christian Democrats in the 1994 general election, failed ignominiously. A decision to open the Holy See's accounts to public scrutiny was vitiated by the revelation that the Vatican Bank had lost billions of dollars through its connection with the Freemason Roberto Calvi, who was found hanged beneath Blackfriars Bridge. The refusal to permit the Italian police to question the bank's head, Archbishop Marcinkus, before his return to America did little to reassure the faithful.
Pope John Paul II has performed three exorcisms, the ancient rite of casting out demons from the souls of the possessed, during his 23 years in the Vatican, according to one of the Catholic Church's top exorcists. He performed the last one in September.
In that battle, the pope sprinkled holy water and commanded the devil to leave the body of a possessed 20-year-old woman, the Rev. Gabriele Amorth said.
But the devil still lingers within the woman, who hails from Milan, Italy, and has undergone several more exorcisms since the pope tried to banish her demon.
"It's a very serious case," Amorth told La Stampa, a well-respected Italian newspaper. "A series of curses."
The Vatican had no immediate response to Amorth's reported claims, which came a day after the pope warned that the devil was leading Catholics into temptation.
"The devil, the 'prince of this world,' even today continues his insidious actions," the pontiff said in last Sunday's sermon. "Each and every man ... is tempted by the devil when he least expects it."
Amorth said the pope performed his first exorcism in 1982 when he drove a demon from a woman who began thrashing on the ground during a Vatican audience.
"This girl was rolling around on the ground," Amorth said. "People in the Vatican had never seen anything like it. For us exorcists, it is run of the mill."
The pontiff prayed over the girl until she calmed down. "He carried out these exorcisms because he wanted to give a powerful example," Amorth said. "He wanted to give the message that we must once again start exorcising those who are possessed by demons."
Exorcisms are rare, but the archdiocese of New York has one exorcist on staff, spokesman Joe Zwilling said.
Godliness appears no deterrent to a determined demon. Even saintly Mother Teresa reportedly underwent an exorcism after Satan invaded her soul shortly before she died of a heart attack in 1997, the archbishop of Calcutta said.
In the Catholic rite, exorcism starts with a blessing and prayers followed by sprinkling of holy water. Then the priest lays his hands on the possessed, makes the sign of the cross and commands the devil to go.
still here 19:46
Americans are so busy keeping up with events in the Middle East that we do not realize how much things have been changing in our own "neighborhood." That would be a grave mistake on our part because - in the long run - the Caribbean and South and Central America are as important to our national interest and even to our winning the War on Terrorism. A Latin America led by Cuba's Castro and Venezuela's Chavez and Brazil's Lula appears ready to plunge that continent back into the mayhem and socialism that made life there so miserable. Given that the three leaders have ties to terrorists or their national sponsors, terrorist groups well could find willing accomplices - the heads of national governments - in our own backyard.
[...]
Americans need to become aware that we face a significant threat to our security in our own backyard. Leaders such as Chavez, Castro and Lula have no real concern for human rights but they mean our country ill will. A Lula may be more polished now, presenting himself as a reformer, not a revolutionary. We should not be fooled nor should our nation's policymakers be gulled into complacency about Latin America because we are so concerned about the Middle East. The world's troubles are not just taking place in a distant part of the globe, it's happening in our own backyard, too. It's about time we wake up to that fact.
'One darned thing after another': That's how former Secretary of State Dean Acheson once defined foreign policy. The latest "darned thing" for the United States is Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
For no apparent reason, the leftist strongman is arming Venezuela to the teeth. He's also supporting local narcoterrorists and other Latin revolutionaries.
Chavez idolizes Cuba's Fidel Castro, is chummy with Libya's Moammar Khadafy and was a Saddam Hussein pal. He's made nasty remarks about President Bush and "suggestive" public comments about Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
According to Gerver Torres, a former Venezuelan government minister, Chavez's "main motivation now is to do everything he possibly can to negatively affect the United States, Bush in particular . . . trying to bring together all the enemies of the United States."
It's tempting to write off Chavez simply as Latin America's latest tin-pot dictator, but that would be a mistake. Venezuela's own "Fidelito" has the potential to cause real trouble for the United States - right in our own backyard.
[...]
Many Americans will find it hard to take Chavez seriously, but his capacity for regional troublemaking shouldn't be discounted, especially as oil prices rocket.
Fortunately, the Bush administration recognizes this and is beginning to craft a new policy to deal with Chavez. The best approach will include working with other regional leaders to contain and isolate him, while not inflaming the dictator's popular support at home.
Chavez recently announced his intent to export his "Bolivarian revolution" (read: Cuban revolution). Considering his disastrous socialist economic and repressive political record at home, we'd better stop him before he gets started.
still here 01:09
"Thank you for inviting me to this day.
It is always an honour and a pleasure to be here, among you.
However, I must admit I believe you should have invited a Palestinian woman at my stead, because the women who suffer most from violence in my county are the Palestinian women.
And I would like to dedicate my speech to Miriam R'aban and her husband Kamal, from Bet Lahiya in the Gaza strip, whose five small children were killed by Israeli soldiers while picking strawberries at the family's strawberry field.
No one will ever stand trial for this murder.
When I asked the people who invited me here why wouldn't they invite a Palestinian woman the answer was that it would make the discussion too localized.
I don't know what is non-localized violence. Racism and discrimination may be theoretical concepts and universal phenomena but their impact is always local, and real. Pain is local, humiliation, sexual abuse, torture and death, are all very local, and so are the scars.
It is true unfortunately, that the local violence inflicted on Palestinian women by the government of Israel and the Israeli army, has expanded around the globe. In fact state violence and army violence, individual and collective violence, are the lot of Muslim women today, not only in Palestine but wherever the enlightened western world is setting its big imperialistic foot.
It is violence which is hardly ever addressed and which is halfheartedly condoned by most people in Europe and in the USA.
This is because the so-called free world is afraid of the Muslim womb."
still here 23:24