Browsed by
Tag: al Qaeda

Person or Not a Person?

Person or Not a Person?

Comments 1 comment

An American Category Sketch of Personhood vs. Non-Personhood – not exhaustive, but representative.

  • So much is under debate.
  • So much is culturally modulated.
  • So much has a history of discussion rather than a solid truth claim.
  • So much seems a little strange.

Warning: Your answers may differ.
This is meant to be thought-provoking; sorry for all the things I’m leaving out.

Comments are welcome, but only if you’re civil. All comments are moderated.

For each of the following, is this a person?

Non-living:

  • Rock – NO!
  • Table – NO!
  • Book – NO!

Beings:

  • Flower – NO!
  • Tree – NO!
  • Monkeygrass – NO!
  • Frog – NO!
  • Beetle – NO!
  • Ant – NO!
  • Tilapia – NO!
  • Worm – NO!
  • Dog – NO! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Cat – NO! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Cow – NO! (DISAGREEMENT)

Scale/Boundary:

  • Electrons – NO!
  • Nuclei – NO!
  • Fungi – NO! (LIFE, MAYBE GROUP INTELLIGENCE OF A KIND, NOT PERSON)
  • Bacteria – NO! (LIFE, MAYBE GROUP INTELLIGENCE OF A KIND, NOT PERSON)
  • Virus – NO – um… probably not! (DEAD/ALIVE, IMMORTAL? SOME UNKNOWN)
  • Prions – NO! (DEAD/ALIVE, IMMORTAL? MUCH UNKNOWN)
  • Mitochondria – NO! (MAY HAVE DEVELOPED HUMANS, HISTORY OF DISCUSSION)
  • Planet – NO! (ECO-REACTIONS, SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Star – NO! (HISTORICAL SMALL DISAGREEMENTS)

Sex/Gender:

  • Female – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Male – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Hermaphrodite – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Transvestite – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Transgender – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Heterosexual – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Homosexual – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Bisexual – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Married – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Single – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Complicated – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)

Class/Money/Economy:

  • Poor – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Rich – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Middle-class – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Blue-collar – YES!
  • White-collar – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Upper-class – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Migrant – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Inner-city – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Rural – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Suburban – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Socialist – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Communist – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Crony Capitalist – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Regulated Capitalist – YES! (DISAGREEMENT) (etc.)

Education:

  • Highly educated – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Highly trained – YES!
  • Untrained – YES!
  • College – YES!
  • No College – YES!
  • Under-educated – YES!
  • Literate – YES!
  • Sub-literate – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Intentionally ignorant – YES! (DISAGREEMENT) (etc.)

Political Values:

  • Democrat – YES! (CONFUSION AND DISAGREEMENT)
  • Libertarian – YES! (CONFUSION AND DISAGREEMENT)
  • Republican – YES! (CONFUSION AND DISAGREEMENT)
  • Independent – YES! (CONFUSION AND DISAGREEMENT)
  • Green – YES! (CONFUSION AND DISAGREEMENT)
  • Reconstructionist – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Imperialist – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Fascist – YES! (CONFUSION AND DISAGREEMENT)
  • Nazi – YES! (HEATED DISAGREEMENT)
  • Uninterested – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Fanatical – YES! (DISAGREEMENT) (etc.)

Nationality / Ethnicity / Race:

  • American – YES! (MINOR DISAGREEMENT)
  • Non-American – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Registered US Immigrant – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Non-registered US Immigrant – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • American Terrorist – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Non-American Terrorist – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Same Ethnic/Racial Composition as Yourself – YES!
  • Different Ethic/Racial Composition from Yourself – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • German – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • French – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Kenyan – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • British – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Chinese – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Iraqi – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Afghani – YES! (SOME DISAGREEMENT)
  • Iranian – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)

Religion:

  • Christian – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Muslim – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Jehovah’s Witness – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Wiccan – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Buddhist – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Fanatical – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Orthodox – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Evangelical – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Reformed – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Unitarian – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Atheist – YES! (DISAGREEMENT)
  • Eclectic – YES! (DISAGREEMENT) (etc.)

Corporate Groupings: (UNDER CONTESTATION!!!!!)

  • Homeland Security – NO!
  • CIA – NO!
  • Dept. of Eduction- NO!
  • NRA – NO!
  • ACLU – NO!
  • Catholic Church – NO!
  • US Marines – NO!
  • Al-Qaeda – NO!
  • Taliban – NO!
  • KKK – NO!
  • Halliburton – NO!
  • Chevron – NO!
  • Microsoft – NO!
  • Google – NO!
  • MacDonald’s- NO!
  • Citibank – NO!
  • Walmart – NO!

Stage / Distinctions:

  • Egg – NO!
  • Sperm- NO!
  • Fertilized egg – NO! (DISAGREEMENT – UNDER CONTESTATION!)*
  • Zygote – NO! (DISAGREEMENT- UNDER CONTESTATION!)
  • Fetus w/Beating Heart – ALIVE, BUT NOT PERSON! (DISAGREEMENT- UNDER CONTESTATION!)
  • Fetus w/Brain Waves – MAYBE! (DISAGREEMENT – UNDER CONTESTATION!)
  • Late-term Pregnancy – MAYBE! (HEATED DISAGREEMENT- UNDER CONTESTATION!)
  • Baby – COULD BE! (SOME DISAGREEMENT, HISTORICALLY NOT, BUT PROBABLY CONSIDERED ONE NOW)
  • Toddler – PROBABLY! (DISAGREEMENT – HISTORICALLY NOT, BUT PROBABLY CONSIDERED ONE NOW)
  • Child – PROBABLY! (DISAGREEMENT- HISTORICALLY NOT, BUT PROBABLY CONSIDERED ONE NOW)
  • Teenager – PROBABLY! (DISAGREEMENT – PAIN IN THE BUTT, AND SOME CONFUSION ABOUT RITE DE PASSAGE)
  • Adult – YES!
  • Middle-Aged – YES!
  • Elderly – YES! (DISAGREEMENT – HISTORICALLY SO, MAYBE STILL IS)
  • Corpse – PROBABLY NOT (SOME RELIGIOUS DISAGREEMENT)
  • Australopithecus – NO! (EXTINCT HOMINID! SOME DISCUSSION)
  • Neanderthals – NO! (EXTINCT HOMINID! SOME DISCUSSION)
  • Early Modern Human (EMH)/Anatomically Modern Human’ (AMH) (also referred to as Cro-Magnon) – UNKNOWN (DISCUSSION and DISAGREEMENT)
  • Homo Sapien Sapien – YES! (MINOR DISCUSSION, MOSTLY BY CURMUDGEONS)

* Fertilized chicken egg does not equal chicken either.

Iraq Numbers

Iraq Numbers

Comments 0 Comment

Iraq causalities may be more than a million.

…a survey of 1,461 adults suggested that the total number slain during more than four years of war was more than 1.2 million. … nearly one in two households in Baghdad had lost at least one member to war- related violence, and 22% of households nationwide had suffered at least one death. It said 48% of the victims were shot to death and 20% died as a result of car bombs, with other explosions and military bombardments blamed for most of the other fatalities.

Here are some more startling stats – via Tom Engelhardt’s excellent article Here Are the Real Numbers That Tally Iraq’s ‘Progress’:

Number of U.S. criminal investigations underway for contract fraud in Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan: 73.

Cost to Pentagon of shipping two 19-cent metal washers to a key military installation abroad, probably in Iraq or Afghanistan: $998,798.00.

Amount paid by the U.S. military to two British private security firms, Aegis Defence Services and Erinys Iraq, to protect U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reconstruction teams in Iraq: $548 million ($18 million a month, with a private army of 2000 – about three military battalions).

Percentage of Iraqi national police force which is Shiite: 85%.

Number of Iraqis in American prisons in Iraq: 24,500.

Number of juveniles (11-17), held in those prisons: Approximately 800 (85% Sunni).

Number of foreign suspected jihadis held in those prisons: 280.

Estimated number of full-time al-Qaeda-in-Iraq fighters: 850 (2-5% of the Sunni insurgency).

Number of times President Bush mentioned al-Qaeda in a speech on the Iraqi situation on July 24, 2007: 95.

Number of Iraqi civilian deaths in August: 1,809 (the highest figure of the surge year so far).

Number of Iraqi “bus people” now in exile in neighboring lands: 2.5 million.

Amount spent by the average household in Baghdad for a few hours of electricity a day: $171 a month ($400 is a reasonable monthly wage).

Number of U.S. Army suicides: 17.3 per thousand, the highest rate in 26 years – not including unconfirmed reports or those who served and then committed suicide at home. In 2006, 99. Since 2003, 118 U.S. military personnel have committed suicide in Iraq itself.

Percentage of people across the globe who “think U.S. forces should leave Iraq within a year”: 67%, according to a just-released BBC World Service poll of 23,000 people in 22 countries. Only 23% think foreign troops should remain “until security improves.”

Percentage of citizens of U.S.-led “coalition” members in Iraq who want forces out within a year: 65% of Britons, 63% of South Koreans, and 63% of Australians. Even a majority of Israelis want either an immediate American withdrawal (24%), or withdrawal within a year (28%); only 40% opt for “remain until security improves.

Percentage of Americans who think U.S. forces should get out of Iraq within a year: 61% (24% favor immediate withdrawal, 37% prefer a one-year timetable).

Percentage of people across the globe who think the United States plans to keep permanent military bases in Iraq: 49%.

Percentage of Americans who believe, that the U.S. mission in Iraq will be seen as a failure in the long run: 57%, (only 29% disagree).

These from “The General Lies” by Robert Scheer:

Percent of Iraqis who believe security has deteriorated since the surge began: 70%.

Percent of Iraqis who believe attacks on U.S. forces are justified: 60%.

Percent of Sunnis (whom the general and ambassador claim are joining our side) that want to see us dead: 93%.

Recommended reading:

America’s Deadly Shock Doctrine in Iraq by Naomi Klein explains how the U.S. set about to destroy the Iraqi national psyche and then push through a disastrous privatization of its economy. The link will lead to an excerpt from the new book.

U.S. Secret Air War Pulverizes Afghanistan and Iraq by Conn Hallinan reports on the U.S. military’s increasingly reliance on deadly air strikes in Iraq and Afghanistan as the ground occupations fall apart, killing untold numbers of civilians.

Faced with defeat or bloody stalemate on the ground, the allies have turned to air power, much as the U.S. did in Vietnam. But, as in Vietnam, the terrible toll bombing inflicts on civilians all but guarantees long-term failure.

“Far from bringing about the intended softening up of the opposition,” Phillip Gordon, a Brookings Institute Fellow, told the Asia Times, “bombing tends to rally people behind their leaders and cause them to dig in against outsiders who, whatever the justification, are destroying their homeland.””


Six Years After 9/11, Why We’re Losing the War on Terror by David Cole and Jules Lobel argue that the Bush administration and its extralegal policies have taken the U.S. from being the object of the world’s sympathy to the object of their scorn.

The proposition that judicial processes and international accountability — the very essence of the rule of law — are to be dismissed as a strategy of the weak, aligned with terrorism itself, makes clear that the Administration has come to view the rule of law as an obstacle, not an asset, in its effort to protect us from terrorist attack.

Our long-term security turns not on “going on offense” by locking up thousands of “suspected terrorists” who turn out to have no connection to terrorism; nor on forcing suspects to bark like dogs, urinate and defecate on themselves, and endure sexual humiliation; nor on attacking countries that have not threatened to attack us. Security rests not on exceptionalism and double standards but on a commitment to fairness, justice and the rule of law. … The preventive paradigm has compromised our spirit, strengthened our enemies and left us less free and less safe.

Take Action to Oppose Iraq Escalation

Take Action to Oppose Iraq Escalation

Comments 1 comment

“Everything we do here is on the defense. Any troops increase over here – they will just be more sitting ducks, more targets.” – Army Sergeant Ronn Cantu, serving his second tour in Iraq.

Get informed, and take action to oppose escalation in Iraq. The war – it isn’t “really” a war, and yet Bush has assumed war powers – is wrong. No “surge” of troops, no bloody sacrificial sop to Bush’s pride can be acceptable to informed Americans.

Sign at least a couple of the petitions, send emails to your representatives, participate in local events, write to your local newspaper or television news station.

Search for local events at America Says No.org (True Majority, Democracy in Action).

Sign the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Petition

Dear President Bush,

On Election Day, America spoke with one voice about its desire to end the war in Iraq. In the weeks and months since, members of Congress from both parties have urged you to heed the will of our nation and propose real change. Regrettably you have chosen to ignore the will of the American people. Concern about your escalation strategy is non-partisan. It is opposed by Democrats, it is opposed by Republicans, it is opposed by top military leaders, and it is opposed by an overwhelming majority of the American people.

Democrats, Republicans and the bipartisan Iraq Study Group have all offered you a roadmap to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis, begin the phased redeployment of American troops and end our open-ended commitment to Iraq. America doesn’t need another White House P.R. campaign — we need a real change of course in Iraq.

United for Peace March on Washington to End the War, January 27th.

10 Reasons Why the US Must Leave Iraq

Teddy Kennedy sums it up pretty well:

The President’s decision to send more American troops into the cauldron of civil war is not an acceptable strategy. It is against the advice of his own generals, the Iraq Study Group, and the wishes of the American people and will only compound our original mistake in going to war in Iraq.

…The mission of our armed forces today in Iraq no longer bears any resemblance to the mission authorized by Congress in 2002. The Iraq War Resolution authorized a war against the regime of Saddam Hussein because he was believed to have weapons of mass destruction, an operational relationship with Al Qaeda, and was in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolutions.

Not one member of Congress would have voted in favor of it they thought they were sending American troops into a civil war.

The President owes it to the American people to seek approval for this new mission from Congress. Congress should no longer be a rubber stamp for the President’s failed strategy, and should insist on a policy that is worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform.

We have been irresponsible in allowing Bush to act like a King. It’s not the President’s decision anymore. It’s ours.

Senator Kennedy has introduced legislation that makes the issue plain. It states that any substantial new commitment in Iraq requires a plan from the administration and explicit authorization from Congress.

Add your name to the petition in support of Senator Kennedy’s legislation.

Stem Cell Funds Veto – Who Benefits?

Stem Cell Funds Veto – Who Benefits?

Comments 1 comment

Bush finally decided to veto something after six years: Stem cell research – a bill that even this Congress passed in both Houses.

“Now that’s something to save yer virgin veto for! All the people who might benefit from the research – well, they don’t matter so much. Those are future people – they don’t hardly count, not like those itty bitty blobs of cells so dear to the heart of that God-guy who’s gonna kill all you damn Liberals right soon. What matters is the manly action (superman!) to protect them pre-differentiated embryonic cells from study before they still get discarded. Well, we never said they wuz goin’ anywheres to thrive.”

My first line of thinking on this was simply that if this research doesn’t go forward here, it will elsewhere. Scientists in other countries will move ahead, and we won’t. Meanwhile, Rove is slinking around with his typical misinformation.
Tell me the truth – are there people who believe anything at all that Rove says? Can’t we just bestow a title, like “Duke of Propaganda and Slander,” upon him? Maybe they could have some pagentry, with flags and boots (or slippers?).

But wait! Didn’t Bush already allow limited funding of embryonic stem cell work in August 2001?
I think we should be debating bioethics on several fronts, including this one.

However, I don’t really think the Bush “virgin veto” is about morals or values – or even religious conformity.
It’s not even primarily about his “base” (did you know that’s how “al Qaeda” translates?).

This bill isn’t so much about the research itself. It’s about the funding! It’s about….privatization!

Private foundations and companies have continued funding this research, after all. It’s an investment.

Hmmm…. could it be that there might be private interests who might (gasp) want to be the ones to make all the money on this?

Maybe even…. some major contributors to Bush and the Republican party?

I wonder if someone would do a crosslisting of the likely companies who might profit from internal discoveries and applications and, say, those who were given the Medicare drug benefit to write for our legislative branch? Can we see a list of the companies who are doing this research now, and their campaign contributions?

I’m sorry to say it (and to believe it too), but when this administration talks values and morals, follow the money.

Corruption is a serious threat to our form of government, and all the more so until we have public-funded elections. The news tonight was full of horrified reporters noticing that some Katrina money was wasted and used inappropriately (they don’t mention the money that went to Pat Robertson, though). Still, we haven’t gotten much explanation of the disappearance of much larger sums through the hands of completely different segments of our population (and corporations who have been granted “personhood”).

What would be the benefit to Americans if the research was funded by the federal government, rather than by corporate interests? I’m not a lawyer, but if anyone out there has an informed opinion on the possibilities here, please comment.

al-Zarqawi is dead

al-Zarqawi is dead

Comments 0 Comment

Finally, it looks as though there has been some valuable on-the-ground intelligence.

The Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (real name Ahmed Fadhil Nazzal al-Khalayleh), the most-wanted terrorist in Iraq, is dead. As far as we know, he was the top guy in charge of kidnappings, beheadings and suicide bombings. Of course, our propaganda campaign may have exaggerated his importance to some degree, but however he got there, Zarqawi was considered the figurehead of the Sunni insurgency. He is said to be the leader of the merged insurgency/al-Qaeda network in Iraq, responsible for killing thousands of Shias and US forces. Jordanian courts have given him the death penalty more than once, and he is believed to have personally beheaded at least two Western hostages, among them American Nicholas Berg, who was slain on camera in late 2004.

The two 500-pound bombs dropped by warplanes on his safehouse seem to be a little bit of an overkill to me, but maybe not, since Iraqi police – first to arrive on the scene – were able to recover his body.

At this point, there are some conflicting reports about who else may have died. His key lieutenant and spiritual adviser Sheik Abdul Rahman al-Iraqi is being named as being among the dead, but seems also to have issued a statement today? An Australian site claims two women were killed in addition to the unnamed 6-7 aides at the safehouse. The story develops.

Al-Qaeda will, of course, try to use al-Zarqawi’s murder as a rallying point, but I don’t think there could really be such a huge following for the idea of “martyrdom” in this case. I hope that his death will contribute to improvements on the ground for the Iraqi people.