PICTURES OF ME, see nothing wrong

ha! i've just now figured it out--apparently one has to read the instructions.

the al gore movie

The Supreme Court, which incidentally ruled earlier today that the Bush administration has no authourity to try suspects of terrorism by military tribunal, will hear the case of Massachusetts v. the EPA. The state of Massachusetts (along with several other US states, cities, and environmental groups) is arguing that the EPA is required by federal law to regulate carbon dioxide admissions as harmful pollutants. The administration counters as follows (from ABC News):

The administration maintains that unlike other chemicals that must be controlled to ensure healthy air, carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is not a dangerous pollutant under the federal law. And, officials argue, even if it is, the EPA has discretion over whether to regulate it, considering the economic costs involved.

The agency should not be required to "embark on the extraordinarily complex and scientifically uncertain task of addressing the global issue of greenhouse gas emissions" when voluntary ways to address climate change are available, the administration argued in its filing with the high court

.
Scientifically uncertain? The most interesting point, to me at least, made by Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth was that a study which sampled over 900 scientific studies found ZERO disagreement on the fact that human activity like increased co2 emissions is the significant factor in global climate change. At the same time, another study of hundreds of news reports on the subject found that 53 percent described this issue as unsettled. Even more telling is a leaked memo from within the Republican National Committee that stated that their aim is to present this settled issue as unsettled--just as Big Tobacco did after the Surgeon General stated publically that there is a significant link between smoking and lung cancer. One has to wonder what good the EPA is if it fails to act just becausethe Court says it is not compelled by law to do so. If reducing the effects of co2 on the environment doesn't fall under their charter, what does?

Another claim you'll hear from skeptics of global warming is that these scientists need the public to believe in global warming in order to secure continued government funding in the form of grants. This is, of course, ridiculous. Lobbyists funded by the oil industry paid to sow the seeds of doubt so that large corporations can continue reap to huge profits have no allegience to the truth. Publically funded Research Scientists on the other hand, well the truth is their business, if they were driven by profits, they'd go work for Big Oil or GM.

a village for an eye

It doesn't appear as if the joint proposal for a two state solution is going to gain much momentum as the Israeli army rattles its sabre at Syria and cuts electricity from many Palestinians. The army is now in control of parts of northern Gaza. The reaction to the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier is, in the words of the Israeli government, "extreme."

The following is an excerpt from the Guardian and describes some of the more relevant reactions:

The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, called the destruction of Gaza's infrastructure "collective punishment and a crime against humanity". Human rights groups said it was in breach of the Geneva conventions which bar attacks on targets of no immediate military value and on reprisals against civilians.

The Israeli army seemed at a loss to explain the value of severing electricity to most of Gaza's population, and destroying bridges that will take weeks or months to repair, unless it is to make civilians suffer in order to pressure the armed groups holding Cpl Shalit. "This is part of an ongoing effort to cause disruption, it's all part of the same effort to get the soldier released," said aspokeswoman, Captain Noah Meir. "It's part of measures against those who are directly involved and those not directly involved." Asked about the impact on the civilian population, she said: "It was something we took into consideration. You do have to understand that we have to get the soldier back."

There are rules of proportionality in international law, in just war theory, in every civilized code of law. The kidnapping is, itself, a terrible crime, but how many innocent Palestinians have to pay for it? It seems that the correct answer should be none.

so close to a flag burning amendment, why?

The Senate fell one vote shy of moving a potential constitutional amendment banning the desecration of the American flag to the states for ratification. Several years ago this issue came before the Supreme Court which ruled that burning the flag is protected political speech. Democrats voted with the majority of Republicans yesterday and Diane Feinstein spoke saying that the flag is, in essence, a national monument which deserves protection like all other national monuments (e.g. the Lincoln Memorial, or something). I would think that since the flag and its images are manufactured for private profit and become the sole property of whoever chooses to buy one, that they are unlike all other national monuments in at least this respect. It has always been illegal to burn someone else's flag. It should be rather obvious that the Republican strategy is to pursue these sorts of irrelevant, but highly emotional issues as a means of distracting the public from it's failed, relevant policies of the past 6 years. It should also be obvious that one cannot champion free speech and disallow non-violent forms of expressing dissent. Democrats, as usual, have taken little more than a diluted "me too" approach to responding to these divisive issues--gay marriage, immigration, and now, again, flag burning. Why not take an approach that is more direct? Why not make Republican divide and conquer tactics a political issue? Why not repeatedly point out their implementation, and their cynicism? Why not ask what happened to the president who once claimed to be a 'uniter'? Why not some courage?

Hamas and Fatah recognize Israel--implicitly

The news today out of the Middle East is varied--more terrible bombings in Iraq, Iran stating that there is no need to conduct direct negotiations with the US, and Hamas and Fatah leaders signing a document that offers a path to the two state solution in Israel and Palestine. Hamas has been pushed to the brink, unable to govern since Western aid was withdrawn a few months ago, but within this new document, there lies some hope. Endorsing a two state solution is in essence a recogniton of Israel's right to exist, this is the first time Hamas has come anywhere near suggesting such a thing. Hopefully, diplomats on both sides can make something meaningful out of this development.

I would very much like to be spicing this site up with pictures but cannot figure out how to do it. The degree of my ignorance regarding this matters is depressing.

Is it interesting to anyone else that nearly every movie theatre is playing both the Al Gore movie and Cars? The latter seems a tad nostalgic for a period when the automobile symbollized all that was American at a cost that most Americans would rather not consider. I'm sure it's very entertaining but I would like to believe that we're near the end of our romantization of the automobile. Surely, we can see the dark side of gluttonous oil consumption by now. Right?

Why don't posts publish immediately?

I mean really, what's the deal with this business? I posted three hours ago, it was commented on and everything and still, it's not there when I open up the weblog.

To everyone who was confused as to who this "famous" actor Ewen McGreggor is, I am ever so sorry. Ewan McGregor is the man to whom I was referring. A friend of mine who cares not at all for sports sat down with me last week to watch the fourth quarter of the fifth game of the NBA finals. He wondered of Merv Alpert was still the big name is basketball play by play. I told him that I'd be shocked if Merv Alpert wasn't a lawyer, but that Marv Albert, in fact, has made something of a comeback from his earlier scandal. So, everyone makes mistakes. I also wrote about Portuguese influence in South Africa when I meant South America. At last, my conscience is clear.

simulicrum

I have nothing in particular to say, but feel the need to post so as to get in the habit.

The party's now over and the reality is that I will be going on a very long flight, to a very far away place for a very long time to do something that I've done before and which I will be expected to do well. I don't mind telling you that I am officially a little scared.

I have not gone to a movie for some months now. I used to go all the time. There really is nothing in area theatres that interests me right now. The Al Gore movie, maybe, but I don't think it's going to tell me anything I don't already know. I feel I should be doing things like that, though, as who nows when I'll get to do them again. That's why I went to Burger King yesterday, had the whopper jr. I used to work with a guy who liked to do the voice of Sean Connery. (apparently I misspelled Ewen McGregor in the last post, I hope I did well by this Scotsman). Anyway, he liked to do that voice ordering a whopper jr.

My battery is about to epire, more nonesense later.

the long way round

Actor Ewen McGreggor and his less famous actor friend Charley Boorman rode their motorcycles around the world two years ago and filmed it. They rode from London through Europe into Russia, Mongolia, Kazakstan, and Siberia. They flew across the Bering Straits into Anchorage and rode from there through Canada and the US until they reached Manhattan. They filmed it and it aired on cable last year, few saw it. I am recomending it as a rental, for no other reason than it is interesting, and more importantly, because the apprehension they feel about this undertaking, the anxiety, the excitement, the fear, the loneliness, the sense of mission all reflect what's going on inside my head these days. As I watched it, it struck chord after chord. In Mongolia, they ate local cuisine (sheep and cow testacles). Everywhere they were helped by kind locals who were as curious about them as they were about the peoples and lands they were encountering. Is this what lies ahead? I hope so.

As I read Indonesia's history, I am struck by the sheer number of foreigners who have travelled to these islands, by the cosmopolitan history of the port cities. What did it take, what kind of person boarded a ship and sailed across the world to work in a land with a climate unfamiliar, and disease for which they received no immunization? The desperate and adventurous, I suppose. Who goes these days? The privileged mostly, but those of the privileged who must feel a need for something more in their lives--I am projecting.

There were three strains of Indonesian nationalism in the early twentieth century: Islamic, Marxist, and National Unity (i.e. nationalism for it's own sake). The Islamic anti-colonialists desiried a land that was part of a pan Islamic movement/world. The Marxists were by definition, internationalists. Those who wanted a united Indonesia above all else won out, led by Sukarno who advocated a unity between all three groups, but said that Marxism and Islam must be subordinate to liberartion and unity. That's where modern Indonesia began. That's the aim of it's strong central government. The Marxists are mostly gone now, or at least silent. The Islamist elements work on the fringe, or so it would seem, but they have support. I'll understand all of this better someday, and I'll write about it then.

Oh yes, soon this blog will contain pictures. Won't that be lovely?

Dutch rule

From the book I'm reading by Jean Gelman Taylor:

From there own history of rule by Spain and struggle for religious freedom and autonomy, the Dutch had acquired a national and religious identity... Their lives were not governed by Kings but by merchants who controlled the administration of Dutch cities. Dutch ships sailed in the northern seas,
the Atlantic Ocean, and, from the end of the 16th c., the Indian Ocean, the South China Sea, and Indonesian waters. Dutch work habits and owrk sites were determined by governing boards of commercial companies located in
Holland's seaboard towns. In 1602 these companies merged
into the United East Indies Company (or VOC).

Getting Away fromTornadoes

As those who keep an eye on news know, Indonesia seems to be in the process of making its case for being the most naturally dangerous land on Earth. As I have begun to research the archipelago's history, I am coming to the conclusion that things have always been this way. One phrase that fits into most recent stories somewhere in the initial two paragraphs is "located on what is known as the 'ring of fire' ..." So, how does one remain calm while accepting that one's new home is liable to shake violently sometimes? The answer: by not thinking about it, and by drinking lots of Sumatran coffee. If I'm always shaking, I figure that tectonic upheavals will be less jarring--I may come to look forward to them, or perhaps not.

A few good questions have been posed to me recently. One, how did the Dutch manage to be a global player in the age of colonization? I don't really know, and will do some research on this. Aside from holding Indonesia, of course, the Dutch had early footprints in New York (once New Amsterdam, why'd they change it? The English liked it better that way.) The Dutch also took South Africa and we all know the wonderful things they did there. The Portuguese ruled Malaysia and Formosa (now Taiwan), not to mention a large part of South Africa. These tiny nations had successful navies and the money to colonize, but they also had the very large companies. Indonesia was known for years as the Dutch East Indies--the west Indies located in the Carribean--very far away; so there was global reach. If anyone wants to take the time to do some research regarding this issue and inform me, I'd be ever so grateful.