Freedom to Hate!
Where does the hate come from? From all of us, in ways big and small.
How does it get incited? In a million little ways. Alone, or in a crowd, it grows, validated sometimes by the popularity of the source.
How does it end? Call it out for the bullshit it is when you can.
I used to like Nugent. Back in the 70's.
Full rant transcript in comments.
8/25/07
8/24/07
8/22/07
George Bush Makes Sense
Quotes:
"A generation shaped by Vietnam must remember the lessons of Vietnam: When America uses force in the world, the cause must be just, the goal must be clear and the victory must be overwhelming." Source
"Our nation should be slow to engage troops. But when we do so, we must do so with ferocity. We must not go into a conflict unless we go in committed to win. We can never again ask the military to fight a political war” Source
Too bad he said these things before he became President.
"A generation shaped by Vietnam must remember the lessons of Vietnam: When America uses force in the world, the cause must be just, the goal must be clear and the victory must be overwhelming." Source
"Our nation should be slow to engage troops. But when we do so, we must do so with ferocity. We must not go into a conflict unless we go in committed to win. We can never again ask the military to fight a political war” Source
Too bad he said these things before he became President.
8/21/07
Forgive The Progress
A tiny slice of a possible future reality, here.
I struggle agreeing that "The printed page is giving way to the networked screen.", per the site's mission statement.
Then again . . . .
What is a book, now?
Has it been fading to history? The age of the printing press will have only ruled for five or so centuries?
And before the book, it was elite hand-written manuscripts. Those wonderful royals, and scholars, and monks. Consider the era of the early Bible - those manuscripts were so special and in the hands of so few. So sad the loss to a way a life with the coming of the press. Pardon the pun intended.
What becomes of the perfect civilization they (we) have invented?
Before the written words, there was language. Before that, there were only simple symbols and sounds. For hundreds of thousands of years, the way these animals we are could make do - and make do we did - was by asserting our clever ways, sharing ideas, adapting for millenia and using the basics at hand: sticks and stones, rock tablets, pictures, cave drawings, art, dances, songs, stories and grunts. Communication perfection. So sad for the sudden loss of status for the artists and storytellers when the change set in to finally culture us with words and grammer. Another loss of another way of life. And the horror! we surely felt with the next change - refinement from the printed books. Now the gutwrenching information age changes are upon us, with the final empowerment of universal knowledge. More barriers come crashing down.
Broadband for all! (Freedom for all? Equal justice for all?)
We will change. In huge ways, like we always did before. Changes bring change; it's not that hard to understand. Or is it?
So of course we should we embrace the change, as we inevitably will, right? Or, shouldn't we fight for a while longer to go back to (stay in?) the stone age?
The answer: Forgive the progress, but never forget.
I love the past and I love the future. And so do you.
A good book in the right room is forever. It's something to read and hold, to smell the age of the pages, to see the dancing and the faces of the characters in your imagination. The warm fire is crackling and lightening the words. You flow in the glow and remember. (But surfing the net and drowning in the data is nearing nirvana.)
Another warm image: a vinyl record album, with it's wonderful cover and inner sleeves - some with lyrics you can actually read without help from Walgreens. (But downloading the latest song is pretty good too - better even: I can color laser print the album art to frame for my music room. Never done it, actually, but I could.)
All precious memories, before the times of changes. Those singers and storytellers and writers. I love them still. And sticks and stones, and dance, and art, and I always love to grunt.
Now as we get dragged through yet another time of change, in our inexorable march to greater cultural sophistication, technological mastery and magically coordinated cooperation (Adam Smith's invisible hand and our collective brain), we will decide to take those single steps on our longest journey, sometimes blind and bloated and bleating all the way. We post the words to our little pages during our short stay - always staying within the natural narrative of the story of humanity. We have always done so, and we are always glad we did. We move forward. It's who we are.
Some say - but it's another long story for another long day - that we are all marching toward the singularity, and soon. Maybe.
What I know is that ideas grow and then live forever. The basics we use in our own age are special to us. They will be treasured, even if they no longer lead the way, even if we let them fade away. What has been lasting is humanity.
But still, our ways will always flow, and ebb, and stop or grow. We build on what was past, and make it better. Deep down in our genes and in flowing through our memes, we appreciate that. We know; we are proud of the civilization we are inventing. And we smile at our pictures of the past. Tonight, I'll have happy dreams of how my child self stayed up too late with E.B. White. After I post this on my blog. Weird.
Oh, the knowledge and memories that we enjoyed, and that our progeny will treasure their way during their times.
Books and songs and all our things. They just keep changing. We are born and we die and we each witness a small slice of reality - only a page from the human story. Over the long term, haven't these changes been for the better? After all, we are the best we can be.
Then again . . . .
What is a book, now?
Has it been fading to history? The age of the printing press will have only ruled for five or so centuries?
And before the book, it was elite hand-written manuscripts. Those wonderful royals, and scholars, and monks. Consider the era of the early Bible - those manuscripts were so special and in the hands of so few. So sad the loss to a way a life with the coming of the press. Pardon the pun intended.
What becomes of the perfect civilization they (we) have invented?
Before the written words, there was language. Before that, there were only simple symbols and sounds. For hundreds of thousands of years, the way these animals we are could make do - and make do we did - was by asserting our clever ways, sharing ideas, adapting for millenia and using the basics at hand: sticks and stones, rock tablets, pictures, cave drawings, art, dances, songs, stories and grunts. Communication perfection. So sad for the sudden loss of status for the artists and storytellers when the change set in to finally culture us with words and grammer. Another loss of another way of life. And the horror! we surely felt with the next change - refinement from the printed books. Now the gutwrenching information age changes are upon us, with the final empowerment of universal knowledge. More barriers come crashing down.
Broadband for all! (Freedom for all? Equal justice for all?)
We will change. In huge ways, like we always did before. Changes bring change; it's not that hard to understand. Or is it?
So of course we should we embrace the change, as we inevitably will, right? Or, shouldn't we fight for a while longer to go back to (stay in?) the stone age?
The answer: Forgive the progress, but never forget.
I love the past and I love the future. And so do you.
A good book in the right room is forever. It's something to read and hold, to smell the age of the pages, to see the dancing and the faces of the characters in your imagination. The warm fire is crackling and lightening the words. You flow in the glow and remember. (But surfing the net and drowning in the data is nearing nirvana.)
Another warm image: a vinyl record album, with it's wonderful cover and inner sleeves - some with lyrics you can actually read without help from Walgreens. (But downloading the latest song is pretty good too - better even: I can color laser print the album art to frame for my music room. Never done it, actually, but I could.)
All precious memories, before the times of changes. Those singers and storytellers and writers. I love them still. And sticks and stones, and dance, and art, and I always love to grunt.
Now as we get dragged through yet another time of change, in our inexorable march to greater cultural sophistication, technological mastery and magically coordinated cooperation (Adam Smith's invisible hand and our collective brain), we will decide to take those single steps on our longest journey, sometimes blind and bloated and bleating all the way. We post the words to our little pages during our short stay - always staying within the natural narrative of the story of humanity. We have always done so, and we are always glad we did. We move forward. It's who we are.
Some say - but it's another long story for another long day - that we are all marching toward the singularity, and soon. Maybe.
What I know is that ideas grow and then live forever. The basics we use in our own age are special to us. They will be treasured, even if they no longer lead the way, even if we let them fade away. What has been lasting is humanity.
But still, our ways will always flow, and ebb, and stop or grow. We build on what was past, and make it better. Deep down in our genes and in flowing through our memes, we appreciate that. We know; we are proud of the civilization we are inventing. And we smile at our pictures of the past. Tonight, I'll have happy dreams of how my child self stayed up too late with E.B. White. After I post this on my blog. Weird.
Oh, the knowledge and memories that we enjoyed, and that our progeny will treasure their way during their times.
Books and songs and all our things. They just keep changing. We are born and we die and we each witness a small slice of reality - only a page from the human story. Over the long term, haven't these changes been for the better? After all, we are the best we can be.
8/16/07
What is Reality
Not exactly Matrix, more like SimCity.
"Dr. Bostrom assumes that technological advances could produce a computer with more processing power than all the brains in the world, and that advanced humans, or “posthumans,” could run “ancestor simulations” of their evolutionary history by creating virtual worlds inhabited by virtual people with fully developed virtual nervous systems. "
Doesn't really change anything though; it's real to me, to us, irrespective of a Prime Designer, or not.
"Dr. Bostrom assumes that technological advances could produce a computer with more processing power than all the brains in the world, and that advanced humans, or “posthumans,” could run “ancestor simulations” of their evolutionary history by creating virtual worlds inhabited by virtual people with fully developed virtual nervous systems. "
Doesn't really change anything though; it's real to me, to us, irrespective of a Prime Designer, or not.
8/12/07
Non-Trivial Paragraph
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Link
Link
8/9/07
"We Don't Torture"
At today's press conference:
Q Thank you, sir. A two-part question. The New Yorker reports that the Red Cross has found the interrogation program in the CIA detention facilities use interrogation techniques that were tantamount to torture. I'm wondering if you have read that report and what your reaction to it is? And the second part of the question is, more than a year ago you said that you wanted to close the detention facility at Guantanamo, and a year later nothing has actually happened in that regard. And the Vice President, Attorney General and Homeland Security Secretary are reported to be resisting such a move. I wonder if you could tell us who's really in charge on this issue, are you doing anything about it, do you expect Guantanamo to be open or closed when you leave office?
THE PRESIDENT: I did say it should be a goal of the nation to shut down Guantanamo. I also made it clear that part of the delay was the reluctance of some nations to take back some of the people being held there. In other words, in order to make it work, we've got to have a place for these people to go. I don't know if you noticed a resolution of the Senate the other day, where all but three senators said we don't want these prisoners in the country. I don't know if it was a 97-3 vote, but it was something-to-three vote. In other words, part of the issue, Peter, is the practical issue of, what do we do with the people. And you say nothing has taken place. I strongly disagree with that. First of all, we are working with other nations to send folks back. Again, it's a fairly steep order. A lot of people don't want killers in their midst, and a lot of these people are killers.
Secondly, of course, we want to make sure that when we do send them back, they're treated as humanely as possible. The other issue was whether or not we can get people to be tried. One of the things I'm anxious about, want to see happen, is that there to be trials. Courts have been involved with deciding how to do this, and Defense is trying to work out mechanisms to get the trials up and running. And the sooner we can get that up and running, the better it is, as far as I'm concerned. I don't want to make any predictions about whether Guantanamo will be available or not. I'm just telling you it's a very complicated subject.
And I laid out an aspiration. Whether or not we can achieve that or not, we'll try to. But it is not as easy a subject as some may think on the surface. Again, I refer to you to the Senate vote. When asked whether or not you want to shut down Guantanamo, and therefore receive some of those prisoners in your home state, there didn't seem to be a lot of support for it. Like, three people said, it's okay by me, in the Senate.
Your other question, sir?
Q Red Cross report?
THE PRESIDENT: I haven't seen it. We don't torture.
Q Thank you, sir. A two-part question. The New Yorker reports that the Red Cross has found the interrogation program in the CIA detention facilities use interrogation techniques that were tantamount to torture. I'm wondering if you have read that report and what your reaction to it is? And the second part of the question is, more than a year ago you said that you wanted to close the detention facility at Guantanamo, and a year later nothing has actually happened in that regard. And the Vice President, Attorney General and Homeland Security Secretary are reported to be resisting such a move. I wonder if you could tell us who's really in charge on this issue, are you doing anything about it, do you expect Guantanamo to be open or closed when you leave office?
THE PRESIDENT: I did say it should be a goal of the nation to shut down Guantanamo. I also made it clear that part of the delay was the reluctance of some nations to take back some of the people being held there. In other words, in order to make it work, we've got to have a place for these people to go. I don't know if you noticed a resolution of the Senate the other day, where all but three senators said we don't want these prisoners in the country. I don't know if it was a 97-3 vote, but it was something-to-three vote. In other words, part of the issue, Peter, is the practical issue of, what do we do with the people. And you say nothing has taken place. I strongly disagree with that. First of all, we are working with other nations to send folks back. Again, it's a fairly steep order. A lot of people don't want killers in their midst, and a lot of these people are killers.
Secondly, of course, we want to make sure that when we do send them back, they're treated as humanely as possible. The other issue was whether or not we can get people to be tried. One of the things I'm anxious about, want to see happen, is that there to be trials. Courts have been involved with deciding how to do this, and Defense is trying to work out mechanisms to get the trials up and running. And the sooner we can get that up and running, the better it is, as far as I'm concerned. I don't want to make any predictions about whether Guantanamo will be available or not. I'm just telling you it's a very complicated subject.
And I laid out an aspiration. Whether or not we can achieve that or not, we'll try to. But it is not as easy a subject as some may think on the surface. Again, I refer to you to the Senate vote. When asked whether or not you want to shut down Guantanamo, and therefore receive some of those prisoners in your home state, there didn't seem to be a lot of support for it. Like, three people said, it's okay by me, in the Senate.
Your other question, sir?
Q Red Cross report?
THE PRESIDENT: I haven't seen it. We don't torture.
8/8/07
The Next Few Months Are Critical
Brilliant! Take a trip down memory lane. Recall the sage advice of the Wise Ones of Washington - those who tell America what to think, because we can't think for ourselves.
Now talk to me about the credibility of these people.
"The Foreign Policy Community is more secretive than the Fight Club." This quote is from Glenn Greenwald at Salon, who provides a more thorough analysis of the sorry state of our foriegn policy discourse.
Now talk to me about the credibility of these people.
"The Foreign Policy Community is more secretive than the Fight Club." This quote is from Glenn Greenwald at Salon, who provides a more thorough analysis of the sorry state of our foriegn policy discourse.
"We Do Not Torture"
Torture is defined as "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity."
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the United Nations on December 10, 1948. Article 5 of the UDHR states that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."
In 1985, Ronald Reagan said of the UDHR, "For people of good will around the world, that document is more than just words: It's a global testament of humanity, a standard by which any humble person on Earth can stand in judgment of any government on Earth." In 1995, Pope John Paul II called the UDHR "one of the highest expressions of the human conscience of our time".
America is party to several international treaties that prohibit torture. Americans are also subject to various laws relating to torture, such as The War Crimes Act of 1996. Despite this, and despite what I feel are compelling moral arguments against torture, Americans, particularly Catholics, seem to approve of torture. Maybe we are just too easily swayed by such fantasies as Fox's show "24".
Here is the question of the day then: Does America torture?
Can you put aside your partisan ideologies long enough to investigate which is the closer approximation to reality?
Is it the rhetoric:
"We do not torture" President Bush, 11/07/2005
"The United States of America does not torture. And that's important for people around the world to understand." President Bush, 11/29/2005
"I want to be absolutely clear with our people, and the world: The United States does not torture. It's against our laws, and it's against our values. I have not authorized it -- and I will not authorize it." President Bush, 9/06/2006
"MR. RUSSERT: Does this new executive order allow measures that if were used against a U.S. citizen who was apprehended by the enemy would be troubling to the American people?
Admiral McCONNELL: I can report to you that it’s not torture.
MR. RUSSERT: How do you fine—define torture?
Admiral McCONNELL: Well, torture is—an attempt to define torture in the, in the executive order, it gives examples: mutilation or murder or rape or physical pain, those kinds of things. Let me just leave it by saying the, the techniques work, it’s not torture. They’re not subjected to heat or cold, but it is effective. And it’s a psychological approach to causing someone to have uncertainty and in a situation where they will feel compelled to talk to you about what you’re asking about.
MR. RUSSERT: And we would find it acceptable if a U.S. citizen experienced the same kind of enhanced interrogation measures?
Admiral McCONNELL: Tim, it’s not torture. I would not want a U.S. citizen to go through the process, but it is not tortures, and there would be no permanent damage to that citizen." Meet The Press Transcript, 7/22/2007
Or is it the reporting:
"One of the sources said that the Red Cross described the agency’s [CIA] detention and interrogation methods as tantamount to torture, and declared that American officials responsible for the abusive treatment could have committed serious crimes. The source said the report warned that these officials may have committed “grave breaches” of the Geneva Conventions, and may have violated the U.S. Torture Act, which Congress passed in 1994. The conclusions of the Red Cross, which is known for its credibility and caution, could have potentially devastating legal ramifications." The New Yorker, 8/13/2007
The first amendment allows me to state my view that members of this administration have clearly broken the law, perhaps even commited war crimes, but I suppose I should be careful, lest I be called an unpatriotic dirty f___ing leftist hippy, which I suppose is your right, as well.
Perhaps it is best to listen to the advice of this administration in these matters:
"But assuming the press reports are right, it's a terrible thing to say, and it unfortunate. And that's why -- there was an earlier question about has the President said anything to people in his own party -- they're reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do. This is not a time for remarks like that; there never is." Ari Fleischer, 9/26/2001
I picked the wrong decade to speak my mind.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the United Nations on December 10, 1948. Article 5 of the UDHR states that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."
In 1985, Ronald Reagan said of the UDHR, "For people of good will around the world, that document is more than just words: It's a global testament of humanity, a standard by which any humble person on Earth can stand in judgment of any government on Earth." In 1995, Pope John Paul II called the UDHR "one of the highest expressions of the human conscience of our time".
America is party to several international treaties that prohibit torture. Americans are also subject to various laws relating to torture, such as The War Crimes Act of 1996. Despite this, and despite what I feel are compelling moral arguments against torture, Americans, particularly Catholics, seem to approve of torture. Maybe we are just too easily swayed by such fantasies as Fox's show "24".
Here is the question of the day then: Does America torture?
Can you put aside your partisan ideologies long enough to investigate which is the closer approximation to reality?
Is it the rhetoric:
"We do not torture" President Bush, 11/07/2005
"The United States of America does not torture. And that's important for people around the world to understand." President Bush, 11/29/2005
"I want to be absolutely clear with our people, and the world: The United States does not torture. It's against our laws, and it's against our values. I have not authorized it -- and I will not authorize it." President Bush, 9/06/2006
"MR. RUSSERT: Does this new executive order allow measures that if were used against a U.S. citizen who was apprehended by the enemy would be troubling to the American people?
Admiral McCONNELL: I can report to you that it’s not torture.
MR. RUSSERT: How do you fine—define torture?
Admiral McCONNELL: Well, torture is—an attempt to define torture in the, in the executive order, it gives examples: mutilation or murder or rape or physical pain, those kinds of things. Let me just leave it by saying the, the techniques work, it’s not torture. They’re not subjected to heat or cold, but it is effective. And it’s a psychological approach to causing someone to have uncertainty and in a situation where they will feel compelled to talk to you about what you’re asking about.
MR. RUSSERT: And we would find it acceptable if a U.S. citizen experienced the same kind of enhanced interrogation measures?
Admiral McCONNELL: Tim, it’s not torture. I would not want a U.S. citizen to go through the process, but it is not tortures, and there would be no permanent damage to that citizen." Meet The Press Transcript, 7/22/2007
Or is it the reporting:
"One of the sources said that the Red Cross described the agency’s [CIA] detention and interrogation methods as tantamount to torture, and declared that American officials responsible for the abusive treatment could have committed serious crimes. The source said the report warned that these officials may have committed “grave breaches” of the Geneva Conventions, and may have violated the U.S. Torture Act, which Congress passed in 1994. The conclusions of the Red Cross, which is known for its credibility and caution, could have potentially devastating legal ramifications." The New Yorker, 8/13/2007
The first amendment allows me to state my view that members of this administration have clearly broken the law, perhaps even commited war crimes, but I suppose I should be careful, lest I be called an unpatriotic dirty f___ing leftist hippy, which I suppose is your right, as well.
Perhaps it is best to listen to the advice of this administration in these matters:
"But assuming the press reports are right, it's a terrible thing to say, and it unfortunate. And that's why -- there was an earlier question about has the President said anything to people in his own party -- they're reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do. This is not a time for remarks like that; there never is." Ari Fleischer, 9/26/2001
I picked the wrong decade to speak my mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
