The Therese Defarge school of Social evo

History for those engaged in creating it. Comprehensive activism and applied memetics.

George Bush can still lie with impunity while escalating tensions that may lead to war.

I remember last December when George Bush's request to retrofit bombers as an obvious preparation for a war with Iran was scuttled by a National Security Estimate that concluded Iran's ended it's nuclear program in 2003. Yesterday on US funded Farda Radio, which is broadcasted into Iran, George Bush charged that Iran's government “declared they want to have a nuclear weapon to destroy people -- some in the Middle East.” George may have been thinking three months was more than enough time for the American people and it's press media to have forgotten events so far back in the past. If so he was almost wrong. The press managed to remember the report, if forgetting the historical context in which it came out. Still no one is really holding George accountable. No one pointing out a pattern of giving false witness despite evidence to the contrary.

"The president shorthanded his answer with regard to Iran's previously secret nuclear weapons program and their current enrichment and ballistic missile testing," National Security council Spokesman Gordon Johndroe further dissimulated. While implying it was just George's deplorable lack of command of the English language Gordon own sentence structure implies that the previously secret program is still underway, sidestepping the issue that our spies say it's not by simply rewording a false witness into an innuendo. This is not an issue regarding a lack of education but a lack of virtue.

The US ersatz Left fails just as sadly. Saying George Bush statement was as uninformed as John McCain's charge of Iran training Al-Qaeda Ploughshare Fund president Joseph Cirincione laments that they are both so wrong about Iran. Unfortunately neither McCain or Bush or wrong about Iran. They are wrong (in the ethical sense) about lying about Iran. They are wrong in the morale sense of wanting to go to war in order to steal resources and turn a profit. They are not wrong in the sense of being uninformed, nor our they wrong that their words might lead to outcomes they desire. This is were Joseph Cirincione IS wrong, this is not the time to go forgiving the romans because they know not what they do. That is the wrong at the heart of the US ersatz Left, trapped inside a box they themselves hold shut of the Anti-Ghandian pacifist tradition.

I know I have lost a lot of people on that last statement, an indication of how tightly shut that box is. The ersatz left might adore pictures of Ghandi but they would reject the man and the organizer he was. There are two traditions in the non-violent movement, that of confrontation and that of conversion. Ghandi and King followed the tradition of confrontation, a tradition of practicing non-violence by rejecting pacifism. Rejecting the vainly meek whimpering that does not firmly say no and mean it. Sometimes it's not enough to “witness” what absolutely must be stopped. There are times for moments of silence and there are times to scream, there are times for order and for disorder. Right now the US nation is the single most violent militaristic country on earth, possible in Earths history. It is more than passed time for the ersatz left to stop dreaming they live in a reasoning, lawful non-violent society. It is time to wake up and see the horrible brutality the rest of the world is seeing when they look at us.

It's also time to to start waking up to the reality that the war is not ending in a year, or two years or four years, or whatever amount of time anyone out their thinks it's going to take for an elected official to stop the war. The war will stop when either the US people, or the rest of the people of the world stop allowing it to happen. That does not mean asking, does not even mean telling our governments to stop, it means not allowing them to continue. That is not pretty, even in a non-violent context. Stopping the war in a militaristic state means stopping the State, means shutting it down. That means disorder, stopping traffic, stopping labor, stopping the economy, it means disrupting the order of things because the order of things is not right. It also means violence because the state is already violent to those who really challenge it's authority. By real I mean ways that stop or hinder it's ability to function rather than make symbolic gestures the state can easily ignore. It's only when we brake with the non-Ghandian pacifist tradition that we will begin to stop the war. 

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 05:28 | link | comments |
iran, anti-war, violence-no-violence

Fascism imploding or How the Neo-cons and Neo-liberals have lost the cold war

In the year 1985 the leadership of the former Soviet Union began to recognize the damage the arms race had been doing to their economy and sought to withdrawal. Rather than embrace this practical step back from insanity, the Reagan administration slowed the process of ending the war on the bases of forcing the Russian to embrace a US style economy. As Soviet leaders did more to pull back from the arms race Reagan and Bush continued to push costly programs such as the Strategic Defense Initiative (AKA Star Wars.) Even after the Malta meeting when George H. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev made a joint statement officially ending the cold war, the economic interest of the Military industrial complex continued the arms race. Early attempts to divert the large amount of resources to address social issues, such as better education and universal health care, faltered as Pentagon threaten base closing rather than reduce the Lion's share of cash flowing into the corporate sector. The war on drugs became the outlet to condone continued use of the US military, as well as military aide, to third world countries. This course was not fundamental altered during the Clinton administration. The return of the Bush family dynasty brought with it a passionate return of the cold war as it became the objective of the US military to be able to conduct two major wars simultaneously in both hemispheres. While pursuing this massive increase of an already outrageous budget, the George W. Bush administration brought the country to the brink of an economic crisis just waiting to crash down on the American people.

Then the September 11^th attacks on the World Trade Towers allowed that massive military to be deployed. Afghanistan presented a target that, while certainly connected to the Al Qaeda, that had long been of strategic interest to the the US. Many people make the connection between war and oil in the Middle East, but a true understanding needs to grow from knowledge of the role oil plays in maintaining the strength of the US economy. The US controls oil and foreign countries, for half a century, need us dollars to buy oil. This is just what allows the US government to float it's obscene deficit while other countries buy US treasury bonds in order to purchase the oil needed to maintain their petrol based economies. An Afghanistan pipeline would allow international access to the Caspian oil reserves that would be under US control of the US oil industry. This was at the heart of the US support of the Taliban when it seemed the right wing law and order regime might succeed stabilizing the Afghanistan under a dictatorial system. Despite the fury and anger of the American people, and the Crusader posturing of the Bush administration, it is questionable our country would have rushed to war had the Taliban succeeded in a final triumph over the northern Alliance. As we all know the Bush administration did not stop their but rather lied in order to lead the American people into a second war, aimed at seizing the Iraqi Oil fields. Even more insanely The Bush administration threaten more wars, targeting both Iran and North Korea, saber rattling that was supported by Neo-liberals such as Ms. Clinton, who even criticized George Bush for not taking a stronger position against Iran.

This move represents a major paradigm shift governing the nature of US imperialism. Until this time the view of the Pentagon was that traditional warfare was not economically profitable or sustainable. Economic imperialism, through institutions including the World bank, International Monetary Fund, and multi-national corporations that exploited cheap labor while becoming the dominate force in third world economies. Military aspects of imperialism shifted to proxy countries whose US trained military are often more loyal to the US than their own people. Wars fought by US forces tended to be quick actions, gaining a quick victory. A victory that was either total or of enough strategic significance to force quick successions at the bargaining table. More background information in this is the nature of the arms industry and the needs of armament self-sufficiency. The research, development and production of arms is an initial cost that must be spread over the entirety of production. If you spend a billion dollars developing an advance weapon system, then produce a thousand such weapons then the cost of the R&D is one hundred million dollars per weapon, while if you produce a million the R&D cost is only a thousand dollars. Even with a military the size of the US, it is difficult to remain self sufficient without selling some of the weapons to foreign countries. Further the US could insure military dominance by controlling the level of technology it supplies to foreign countries so as to maintain a combat edge over it's customers. The invasion of Iraq represent a return to direct conquest based imperialism that had been abandoned after proving it's disastrous nature in the two world wars of the early 20^th century.

This is at the heart of US Fascism. While most Americans refuse to even recognize US imperialism, and even the US left shies from using the F word, the US does manifest a number of Fascist tendencies. As my step-father was so fond of saying, you can no more be a little fascist than a little pregnant. It is more than time for Americans to look at the Fascist nature of the US in terms of a historical understanding of what fascism is rather than one based on wartime propaganda and leftest name calling. Fascism derives it's name from the bundles of sticks that in Roman culture represented the concept of imperium or the right to rule an invaded land as extended by the Roman Senate to a Imperator. These bundles of sticks as a representation of military authority by the bars worn by Lieutenants and Captains in most modern Armed forces. It is from the concept of imperium that the world imperialism is derived, and we can see the continuum of this concept in such Imperial apologies as the white mans burden. While only a ancient prototype of fascism, we can see the beginning of fascism when imperium was extended to Imperators over the fatherland, creating a military state. This military state avoided a permanent war economy because it's military strength was not built on industrial might. It's military was surprisingly cheap with a total manpower of approximately 250,000 at the hight of it's power. The advance technology the military depended on was roman engineering and a road system that only improved the economy. Considering some 54% of our GNP goes to military spending, and the ties in between the military industrial system and the oil industry that provides the fuel for a modern military, it is not possible to say the same. So compared to ancient Rome we are closer to fascism because we do have a permanent war economy. We do not have direct military rule, but this could not be said of Fascist Germany or Italy either. Although a war veteran Hitler was not in the military when he came to rule or afterwards. Although he wore a uniform while in power, his military experience was as an enlisted man in the trenches during the four year of the war. He did were a Military Uniform while in office, but then so has president Bush who never saw warfare first hand. German fascism was not military rule, Militaristic rule by a corporate state. That corporate state needs profits, and to maintain those profits, that corporate state needs both war and oil. It also needs an industrial infrastructure dependent on either a strong economy or material gains in conquest. This returns us to the current wartime situation and how it has effected both America's military might and it's economy.

The US has failed to convert the conquest of Iraq to the successful plundering of it's resources. The US invasion tore down the centralized dictatorship that was maintaining a brutal but firm stabilization of the country. The US invasion may have displaced that dictatorship, but failed to replace that dictatorships role in maintaining order. The US did not bring democracy, it did bring chaos and the collapse of infrastructure and institutions that maintained if not a successful economy at least a sufficient one. While the gain, and we are talking about the gain necessary to sustain a fascist state, did not come the cost was immense and continues to grow. Having already destabilized the domestic

economy with unnecessary tax cuts to the rich, The Bush administration maintained the economy by artificially generating the housing industry, keeping a low prime rate to spur housing starts. Although many American's live in substandard housing, and the shortage of affordable housing within the reach of working and lower middle class Americans the artificially driven industry did nothing, and continues to do nothing to address these needs. The profit of selling one high end house between the half million and million range is more than selling many houses affordable by working people. The result of this is two fold, every time an overly expensive house is sold, it pushes up the cost of the housing around it

up, and the industries insistence on high end housing requires a focus on pushing consumers to buy the most expensive house they can. This creates the so-called housing lust, a misnomer indicating a desire arising from the passion within the consumer rather than the industry. Even as mortgage failures have begun a global financial crisis, and despite the growing shortage of low cost housing, the industry continues to build exclusively high end housing further digging themselves into an economic pitfall. This situation provides a strong incentive for other countries to buffer themselves from the collapsing US economy by ending their dependence on US dollars. It only requires the Russians to begin selling oil for rubbles to allow a mass international sell out of US treasury bonds to insure a depression The US may never recover from. Nor can the blame for unsound economic policies of the housing industry be solely place on the Neo-conservative or Republicans as municipalities across the country see growth and new housing starts the vital force in motoring their local economies. Even as the housing industry falls deeper into recession housing starts continue to be high end driving the industry down further.

In the meantime the Iraq war has scene a wide scale capital depreciation of it's vast investment in a two hemisphere military. In Iraq equipment is both used more frequently and under harsher conditions. It is very likely that even if the war ended soon the equipment will be degraded, perhaps to the degree that it isn't even worth transporting back home. No doubt the hawks of our nation will want it replace, and as likely they still expect the rest of the world to finance that expenditures despite both the growing advantages and feasibility of buffering themselves from our fiscal madness by no longer investing in our economy. With our economy in shambles, our expensive military reduced to junk, and are control of oil reserves slipping we could easily end up losing the cold war by continuing to fight it. Although with Peak Oil and Global warming the victory may be short lived, Khrushchev prediction of burying the US may still be true as we sink into a less than first world economy.

The point about fascism may seem yet to be proven, as most people associate fascism with genocide and totalitarian control of thought. Many feel American's are incredibly free, to free to be called fascist. Before we go their let look at some features that our more structurally related to fascism. Hitler's entire rule was an emergency one, the constitution was in effect but the enabling act allowed it to be discarded. As early as the Roosevelt administration the constitution was being undermine by administrative agencies that bi-passed the checks and balances of the constitution. Extensions of the executive branch these agencies were given the power to write legislation that have the force of law, the power to enforce those laws, and internal review process that served as a judicial process. The executive branch had begun giving powers to agencies that it did not itself possess. How this legalistic concern materialize into a visible problem can be seen in the attempt by congress to control corporate labeling that misrepresent their products in the 90's. After the law was passed their was high spirited hope by nutritionist and other health care specialist as they waited for the new regulations to be writen based on the law. The shock came when the FDA used their mandate to attempt to disassemble the health food industry, requiring congress to scramble in order to write legislation to protect that industry as the corporations were allowed to continue misrepresenting their products. Throughout the 80's the bill of rights took a beating as both republicans and democrats took aim on rights of their own choosing. Some democrats might balk on this, but no real democracy has ever existed without the right to bare the arms of the day. Even if that were not the case, they could hardly be expected to defend rights attacked by the republicans while at the same time attacking other rights guaranteed by the same document. More recently the patriot act, Guantanamo, attacks on Habeas Corpus all undermine the constitutional government do to emergency conditions as embodied by the war on terror, the latest continuation of the cold war.

Where is the mind control of totalitarianism, how about the fact that long after the rest of the world knew Iraq had nothing to do with 911 most American's still believed this was true? In the years immediately following the conquest of Iraq many American's were convinced that weapons of mass destruction had been found? Still not satisfied? How about the recent study by Duke Universities Dan Ariely and researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology regarding the Placebo effect? In this study 85 percent of the volunteers who were given sugar pills purported to be pain relieves costing $2.50 said they felt less pain, while only 61 percent of those given sugar pills purported to have been marked down to ten cents felt relieve. As one visitor from the former Soviet Union once said, both the US and the Soviets had propaganda, but the people of the Soviet Union recognized it as propaganda. Which country then is more totalitarian in the control of the thoughts, understandings and opinions of their population?

That leave the question of Genocide. Yet Genocide has never been a necessary prerequisite to Fascism, neither Franco or Mussolini saw the need for antisemitism to create or maintain a fascist state. If we compare US fascism to Fascist Spain or Italy, we can find ourselves closer to German standards than we like to admit. Certainly the attack on the Hispanic work force of industries depend and the global assault on the Islamic fate is questionable, the regular displacement of poorer American's by gentrification, or the disproportionate incarceration of African American's are all questionable practices related to genocide, but the soundest claim toward an American's created genocide comes from a sector that might surprise many. Those who consider themselves left of center and concerned about both the earth, yet still refuse to forsake imperial privileges. Bio-fuel has already begun to satiate American fuel consumption at the cost of third world bellies. The Mexican staple tortillas has risen 100% in price as a result of bio-fuel. As Castro pointed out in his April third Granma article, the world surplus of grain after filling human needs is 80 million tons while the bio-fuel needed to replace 20% of the west dependence on petrol would be 500 million tons. Three Billion human beings are endanger of death generated by an American greed and selfishness. Genocide enough?

Beyond on this the pattern we are now seeing proves fascism exists in America. The permanent war state, that needs not only to maintain profits but increase them. The economy that can't pull back from a mad suicidal pace is the final proof of American Fascism. Nor will are upcoming elections set us free, as no candidate elected will truly seek to end the war.

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 13:51 | link | comments |
babylonian renaissance, anti-war, fascism

The damn strategy within a strategic context.

         I first heard of Largo some time before the founding of EFWA, at the same time learning about the damn strategy. I am not sure of the richness of my understanding at the time, my full understanding of the strategy was not complete until years later. It was not called the damn strategy but for the purpose of this document it is as good a name as any. The key to understanding the damn strategy is to understand the progression through the spectrum from tactical non-violence to armed struggle as laid out by Nelson Mandela to the African National Conference in his proposal to embrace armed struggle. The previous speaker had suggested that the movement had failed non-violence. Nelson began his presentation by saying that the movement had not failed a non-violence but non-violence had failed the movement. He then stated that in the progression toward tactical armed struggle the steps option to consider were; sabotage, terrorism, and Guerrilla warfare. He ruled out Guerrilla warfare on the bases that the organization was not prepared for this step, having no force capable of conducting such operations. He ruled out terrorism because this would alienate the movement from support outside South Africa's borders. He proposed that the movement start a program of sabotage while recruiting and training a revolutionary Guerrilla force.
       When Oldie talked to me about this in the 80's he expressed the belief that Nelson was the greatest revolutionary theorist alive at the time. In saying this he did not exclude himself, which was unusual for him. The damn strategy contained three essential elements. As I will mention elsewhere, Gino failed to ever attempt to do all three at the same time in order to consummate the strategy. I will explain how Gino implemented this strategy elsewhere while here explaining how the tactic would work if truly implemented. I think this is important because it was Oldies intention that the strategy be used to understand the nature of armed struggle and it's role in liberation struggle. I believe that today this understanding is crucially important, primarily for the reason that by accepting the need to progress to sabotage, the ANC succeeded in eventually achieving one of the most bloodless yet successful revolutions in history. Today the anti-war movement, just as the anti-globalization before it, is hamstrung by a "non-violent" movement that rejects either property destruction, sabotage or direct actions aimed at interfering with the functions of the state and the capitalist economic structure it supports. This movement rejects the understanding of confrontational non-violence Ghandi preached while giving a false, insincere reverence to his name. The current war in Iraq began with a lack of public support that Vietnam war did not face until it was some 10 or more years in progress. Had a broader spectrum of the movement embraced shutting down the state, stopping the economy and allowing no business as usual, no war would have happened and hundreds of thousands, perhaps eventually millions of lives would have been saved.  Instead Americans chose to allow the war to happen rather than rejecting the pacifism Ghandi would never have endorse, preferring to avoid
confrontation and eroding their self image as orderly and law abiding citizens of a great democracy. Ignoring the reality that that so called democracy has both the largest army and the largest empire in history.
        The first element of the strategy was to seize the damn and set explosives to blow it up, but not to destroy it immediately. At the same time another group on the east coast would seize a radio explaining that the damn would be blown after giving a set time for evacuations to take place. No demands just get the people out before we blow it. In Oldies version of this the cadre reading the announcement would slit their throat afterward as a display of commitment. The announcer would be selected by drawing straws before hand. I found this part repulsive. I could at that time, and even now would be willing to give my life for a struggle, yet I think the idea of slitting your throat for symbolic reasons a desecration against the nature of life itself. This was Oldie own romantic conception that does not come from the reality that slitting ones throat was harder than he seemed to think.
         My step-fathers most public critics are incorrect in assuming an earthen damn was the true target of this strategy. The damn needed to be one that was part of the infrastructure, the necessary movement toward sabotage. On this scale it would have been one of if not the most effective blow against the national infrastructure achieved during the era. It was also a blow the state was not likely to sit by and allow to happen, meaning that the state would attempt to take the damn before the deadline was reached, likely before the evacuations were completed.  The significance of a major infrastructure such as an electrical power source was an absolute essential as it would insure the deployment of regular troops to regain control of the damn prior to it’s destruction, and likely before evacuations are complete. This meant that successfully repelling one attack, and remember in addition to shoulder-arms Largo possessed a working mortar, so the resistance of an initial attack is not out of the question. This successful defense would have placed Largo in a position of heroically holding out to allow the evacuations to be complete, then successfully destroying their target. If the first attack could not be resisted the damn would be blown and the State could be targeted for not allowing the evacuations to be completed.
        The third element would have been a rural force beginning a campaign of Guerrilla, with the capacity to continue that campaign for at least six months. Either the group would begin gaining support to progress toward a successful revolution, or it would be crushed after demonstrating that a revolutionary armed struggle was possible inside the US. It would also have international effects that might advance global resistance to US imperialism while the US was engaged in internal struggles. This is the three sections of the intended Largo structure, urban and rural Guerrilla and the third element is sometimes conceived , encouraged by Oldies romantics as a suicide unit but should really be described as a unit ready to confront regular US troops. The reality should be the understanding that these in most cases be the same thing in an initial attempt at armed struggle.
        Why the damn strategy never came to pass is something history will never know. The Public Eye stated in it’s 1984 article that the first wave “got cold feet”, Gino always told me something different. After the success of the Long Island farm workers organizing drive Eastern Farm Workers Association led to the initiation of the I. M. Young potato strike, the majority position was to engage in a prolonged strike that would drive the horizontal expansion of the entity leaps. Neither Polly Gardner or Mary Struggler ever disputed this. I know from my experience with his opposition to the implementation of the Omega-7 strategy that he used manipulation to oppose policy indirectly while seeming to support it. I like to believe that when Oldie was younger and physically more capable of leading an armed struggle he may have been bolder.   
 

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 16:25 | link | comments |
gino parente, largo, violence-no-violence

Vingh within the context of Parentism

As far back as 1967 I had the general understanding of dialectics on the level of the average educated American. That dialectics described a process from theses, anti-theses to syntheses. This is an understanding of dialectics that predates Hegal and goes back to the scholastisicm of early universities. At that time a student would ask a question that the lecturer would discuss. After this a student would present a counter position and on the next day the lecturer would provide a final syntheses on the subject. With in this academic context the need is to provide a final answer that is not in motion with the real world. This is an academic concept not a praxis based one. In praxis a dialectician seeks to frame a dialectic in order to resolve a dichotomy in a way that advance the historical self interest of the oppressed classes.

     According to Oldie the term Vingh applied to various systems of winning at roulette used by gamblers in the Netherlands. Roulette may be played two ways, either picking a specific number or picking red or black, in terms of a system, and in general by my opinion, it is better to bet on black or red. This is essentially a coin flip, which most of us know is a 50/50 chance. We also know that this is in an infinite reality (or maybe we don't all know that?). In practice if a coin comes up heads, it will often come up heads again, and even again. Maybe in roulette red will come up, then red again, then black and red. The phenomena that red is coming up more than black is vingh.

     In Parentism Vingh is used to describe the dialectic that resolves a dichotomy such as the conflict between organizational survival and revolutionary purpose. Prior to Feb 1979 the dialectic that define the MBA strategy was consistent with organizational growth and survival while not inconsistent with revolution, after 79 it became consistent with revolution not inconsistent with organizational growth and survival. This slight change between consistent and not inconsistent was what vingh meant within the context of Parentism.

This understanding of dialectics shows the nature of Oldies understanding within a Stalinist framework as Described in the work Dialectical and Historical Materialism written by Stalin in '38. The concept of quantitative change to qualitative change is an essential element of the Praxis based Stalinist tradition of Marxist Leninism that is often explain through the analogy of boiling water. Water starts slowly rising in temperature one or two degrees at a time. Water that is 70* is not very different from water at 72* or even 75*. The water continues to increase a degree at a time and in the same way 200* water is essentially no different that water at 201*. When the water reaches 212* the quantitative change has become a qualitative change and what was water now is stream. The change of temperature from 211* and 212* is not a large shift, but it is significant in that the slight difference is at the point when the dialectic has inverted itself, what was water is now steam. In the same way the shift from consistent with organizational growth and survival not inconsistent with revolution, to the one were the consistence of revolutionary aims take precedence over the still significant concern for Organizational survival. Although the Offensive era began in '79 the Organization unofficially but in all practical terms retreated from an offensive posture in just a few years. The exact moment of which would be open to debate although there are a few useful benchmarks including the Public Eye article, Reagan's innuendo's about Nicaragua being closer to Texas than New England was as well as claims of Libyan death squads. All of these provided various excuses for Oldie to retreat from the organizations offensive posture.

Elizabeth Parenti-Soba

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 21:02 | link | comments |
dialectical and historical mater

The court martial Of Lt Watada

Today what will likely be a significant trial in United States history, the court-martial of 1^st Lt. Ehren Watada for conduct unbecoming an officer and for missing a troop movement as a result of his refusal to deploy in Iraq. Lt. Watada stand is based on moral and legal obligations in regards to what is an unlawful, unjust and immoral war of aggression that is a direct result of lies and misinformation intentionally told by the President and his administrations. The response from the US armed forces as expressed by Joseph Piek that “soldiers can't just pick and choose which war they would like to fight or where they would like to deploy” fails to recognized the reality of deception contained within this wars specific history. 1^st Lt Watada is not making a choice based on personal preference, likes, dislikes, or any other will of the wisp. 1^st Lt Watada has placed himself in legal jeopardy for the singular reason, recognized now by the vast majority of the worlds population, that the war with Iraq is an illegal war of aggression brought about by the lies of one man and his cronies. The legal and military history of the past century has recognized the responsibility of individuals to refuse orders that violate international law.

Despite the false witness of the Bush administration neither Saddam Hussein nor Iraq had any connections with September 11^th or with the Al Qaeda. Nor was their any viable evidence that indicated the existence of weapons of mass destruction. The evidence that was presented by the Bush administration was false and was known to be false by the administration at the time. The Bush administration purposely misled the population of the US and it's allies in order to use the single greatest tragedy in our nation history to advance their own immoral agenda. Recent surveys of the populations of some of the United States' closet allies ( Britain, Canada, and Israel) show that much of the world considers our president one of the greatest threats to world peace. Americans need to use the trial of 1^st Lt Watada to come to grips with the reality that our leaders have been criminal renegades who have initiated unprovoked wars in all likelihood for the profit of those leaders and their close associates. Iraq oil reserves and control of them lie at the heart of the US occupation of Iraq, and the profiteering of this war has been blatant with contracts consistently been awarded to companies like Haliburton with close ties to the administration. Our national interest in Iraq oil reserves go beyond our greedy thirst for oil as the worlds largest consumer of that rapidly depleting resource. Our influence and control over oil creates a world market where US dollars are needed to buy oil, so that the need by industrial countries to consume oil serves to prop up the value of the US dollars. Yet despite this substantial conflict of interest most Americans, even many against the war, continue to see the US as an neutral influence in the growing civil war our aggression has initiated.

This is at the heart of the controversy of 1^st Lt Watada's refusal and his court martial. If by any chance 1^st Lt Watada succeeds in defending his refusal to deploy, his innocents can only be demonstrated by an acknowledgment of our nations guilt in conducting an illegal and immoral war.

This is way in all likelihood 1^st Lt Watada will be found guilty in a trail that history will acknowledge was neither fair or just. Before the trial has even begun Lt Watada A judge already has ruled that Watada cannot question the war's legality as a defense yet any objective legal or political evaluation of his case will understand that this is not only an important point but the primary issue underlying. Unless others in the military begin to embrace their duty to defend the constitution against a corrupt leadership that lied to it's citizens and allies, initiate a war of aggression and sustained an occupation of a country whose resources we covet 1^st Lt Watada will be forced to play the martyr. The military is not alone in shirking it's responsibility, congress, both democratic and republican, has failed in continuing to support a war they know and acknowledge is wrong. Nor is it just militarizes that conduct war. The economy of an entire nation is required to sustain a war, particularly one so far beyond a nations borders. Each American, EVEN if they oppose the war in protest, support the war by allowing our nation to go on with business as usual. The Vietnam war was not ended by voting or by petitioning our leaders. Rather it was ended by disobedience and non-co-operation, by refusal to fight by soldier, by refusals to work by citizens, by the taking over of college and federal buildings. Despite the hundreds of thousands of people who collect on the Mall last weekend and in other protests over the past few years Americans have not truly begun to oppose the war by refusing to force it's end by refusing to continue with business as usual.

In my heart and mind I cannot but see that 1^st Lt Watada will in all likelihood be convicted in bias and unfair trial, sentenced by officers less responsible and less courageous then himself. I think even now we must begin to wrestle with this truth and how we must respond to it. Will 1^st Lt Watada's brave stand go down in history like the rioting of Catholic women that freed their Jewish husbands from Hitler's SS? A rare and forgotten anomaly in the face of wide spread compliance? The time for compliant protest peppered by occasional and symbolic arrested has past. The time for broad popular non-co-operation has long since come. We, as a people, need to begin things like general strikes, even if only day long, mass civil disobedience, divesting stocks and government bonds, canceling credit cards. It is a fact that most Americans oppose the policies of their leader, it seems as well that most Americans lack the courage and conviction to take a significant morale stand against what they know to be wrong. If 1^st Lt Watada succeeds in winning his day in court, he may well succeed in winning a major victory that will contribute to ending this war. If, as is more likely he is unjustly convicted history will call on others to do more. Let us not allow 1^st Lt Watada's conviction be the silencing of truth but a call of alarm to incite the American people to their historic duty. We should begin planning now for how we can act in such a way to make a meaningful difference.

Elizabeth Parenti-Soba

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 13:35 | link | comments |
, iraq war, us military, watada

In search of responsible design.

I want to first establish who I am, or rather where I stand in relationship to the institutions and parties involved in this issue. I am not what one would identify as a member of the Christian right, I am a strong support of a womans right to choose, I have been bisexual for what is getting far to close to half a century, and part of my social anarchism has involved the exploration of new forms of social interrelationships such as redefining family. I do commit a good deal of time to bible study, particularly critical bible study. Although an anarchist and not at all associated with the establishment of the church I am a catholic in the understanding of the universality Agape feast, and the breaking down of class and other social barriers as consistent with Paul's first letter to the Corinthians. I believe that Paul's 2^nd letter to the Corinthians can be seen as rebuking the concept of fundamentalism. I also believe in the veneration of the mother/lady that was handed down through my Italian and Irish heritages.

I want to also identify myself in relationship to science and to schools. Science is part of my life, as I work in the field of survey and public opinion research. I am very aware that most American's who graduate from the school systems are almost totally unaware of the hows and whys of basic scientific method. We should all be aware right now that the inability of most Americans to understand the basics of how science establishes proofs greatly hinders that average American in establishing an informed position on the controversies around vote counting and e-voting. There is a significant amount of evidence that demonstrates that elections are likely to have been tampered with, but the average American is unequipped to understand the significance of much of this evidence. The growing concerns around peak oil and global warming are also issues where many people are ill informed in part because they are essentially uneducated in science. Science is not very well taught in public schools today, not because evolution is not taught but because science is not adequately taught.

When I was young I bought without question the image of the Scopes trial that was taught to me and most Americans in the Play/Movie “Inherit the Wind”. This story most likely shapes the views of many American's both toward the historic event of the trial and the legal battle over evolution. “Inherent the Wind” lied to us, William Jennings Bryant's answer to the questions asked him by Clarence Darrow were change to make him seem foolish, we where not told the reporter H. L. Mencken who paid Scopes fine, was a racialist in his understanding of eugenics. We where not told the textbook being taught out of was “Hunt's civic biology” a book on eugenics that promoted state intervention to discourage inferior families which he labeled as “parasites”, from reproducing. What was being taught at that segregated all white Dayton Tennessee high school by John Thomas Scopes was the same understanding of evolution that would eventual lead to the genocides in Europe under the Nazi. At that time people like Harvard president A. Lawrence Lowell would embrace eugenics, and Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes would rule in favor of involuntary sterilization. William Jennings Bryant had reach the conclusion that evolution as interpreted by individuals such as Friedrich Nietzsche had led to a brake down of morality that led to the 1^stst and 2^nd world wars. It is also true that the eugenics that dominated evolutionary theory, such as that taught by John Thomas Scopes, guided America down the same road, toward decisions that where as brutally immoral. world war. There was a great deal of truth in this evaluation, Darwinism emerged during the rise of imperialism and industrialization. It provided a rational to defend the exploitation and deprivation of lower class' and subjected peoples. Form the Victorian age to today the idolization of competition within it's claimed role in the advancement of humanity is seen as a reason to negate values such as Compassion, Justice, Mercy and Co-operation. Nietzsche views on evolution, framed by himself as rejection of Christianity and it's moral doctrine, did in part drive German militarism in both the 1

So, that was evolution then taught in schools, but what about schools today. I remember something I learned when I had left high school, before I returned to finish. The soccer great Pele had been recruited to a US team, but the season was something of a failure economically. A commentator was noting that with soccer being an important part of the physical education program an educated audience was being created for soccer in the long term. I was a young commie at the time so I noted that the education system in the public school, at least in terms of physical education, was focused not so much teaching students methods to stay fit throughout their lives, but rather to create an educated spectator or audience. It may be that at times science as it is taught in public schools, may serve to create the educated audience, or perhaps the trained citizens for the scientists of the future. During the Scopes time, people like Hunter where teaching their eugenics to the citizens of the future in the hopes that they will influence citizens to accept the civic policies advocated in his civic biology. They where not being taught how to reach a scientific conclusion, but rather to accept certain dominate conclusions that some influential lobby has included in the teaching agenda. Eugenics as positive eugenics has had something of a rebirth, the trouble is that in presence of inequality and power imbalance people with an advantage tend not to recognize their advantage and I would be highly suspect of any eugenics program. Far more controversial is the question of Genetically modified organisms, which to some degree through lack of labeling requires and other such advantages, has been forced into a less than willing market. Many see a significant threat to the ecology and the survival of our species, but the progress GNO have had in economy, and the influence of genetic science with government Has ensured public protest will for the most part go unheard in the rush for profits and for research dollars.

Now I realize my argument seems pretty disjointed at this point, but underlying both the marketing of GNOs and the teaching of civic biology is a rejection of intelligent design. What I mean is that with an understanding that evolutionary change is random and slow, and with this changed judged solely beyond it successfulness in surviving, a eugenicist can argue that changes that are decided on through an improving of natural selection with a program of civic biology, being driven by reason not chance would better the species. If it was all random anyway, a society that placed a fair amount of faith in reason could easily decide that a reasoned decision my by that societies best leaders, all with that societies invisible prejudices, could be trusted to make a better choice than random chance. The promotion of natural selection as if it was a scientific statement of right makes right and ends justifies the means, evolution requires we look at the success of each species only in terms of it's survival. Individual like Nietzsche saw from this that morality and laws that protected the weak from the strong were not a good but were an evil, his idea is not dead today. It's really very parallel thinking that if all that matters is that a tomato is ripe on the shelf for a longer period it perfectly fine that it has chicken genes in it. If there is no guiding force or forces, no plan, no direction, if all that matters is the success of an individual in the fight of all against all, Wolf Larson's organism struggling to the top of the slime, then as long as such a tomato benefits humanity as determined by it scientific, business and government leaders it is the right decision for mankind. Look and you can see if there is any kind of basic plan for life it would likely prohibit chicken genes being introduced into the genetics of a tomato. If the genetic material is just the outcome of random mutation process through a natural selection based on competition, there is just not the same sense that such technology defies prudence. I am concerned to what degree the teaching of evolution in school, as it is taught in school today, may serve by establishing the authority of geneticist and so strengthen there position in political and social controversies their science is engaged in. That science in public school teach the validity of evolutionary theory without equipping their students to understand scientific methods of establishing proof, looks very bad within that context. In the absence of the individuals ability to determine on their own the validity of information they become dependent on the views of experts deemed authorities. I know many individual scientist who are men and women of integrity, but I am also aware that to a great degree the integrity of science is undermined by the funding driven nature of it's policies and the development of it's institutions.

I don't think it can be said that intelligent design is a scientific theory, but I think it is a natural argument to make within a historical context. Evolution is different than other sciences that have at times disagreed with the teaching of a prominent religion, such as the understanding of a heliocentric solar system or a round earth. We have to remember that the Victorian age in which evolution was introduced was one faced with the moral contradiction of both the industrial revolution and the height of British Imperialism. The Malthusian shadow of evolution has always linked it to an apology supporting the disenfranchisement of those oppressed and exploited for the cause of economic progress without regard to their humanity. Evolution always seems to have a rule of right and wrong based on the success in the struggle for survival, intelligent design states that their may be something more. The reality is that their may be many things more. The rate of growth in rye grass is far slower than the rate of change within an evolving plant or animal, with changes observable in days weeks and months instead of over generations. Yet it would be absurd to sit in a field and try to observe the grass growing, the change is just too far beyond are perceptions. The evolution of the human species over tens of thousands of years involve so large a range of random effects that any small yet significant tweaking would be beyond are ability to observe or comprehend. I don't want my argument to be confused here with an “if god meant man to fly he'd be born with wings”. I am not saying this but what I am saying is that for any designer to be intelligent it would need to exist beyond the limitation of an individual entity within the biological change in question. That the CEO of Monsanto, that some official in the FDA, by a scientific community whose research is funded by corporation or governments could make a wise decision within the scope of redirecting a evolutionary chain involving hundreds of millions of individuals over hundreds of thousands of years and speak with the authority of scientific truth is as arrogant as thinking the sun and star revolve around you. It is only possible to rationalize such a position within the context that everything is random and that there is no designs, and success which becomes the power to force your understanding as the general assumptions made by those who govern human society. Nor is this a question of godhead, I see in memetics a possible understanding of an evolutionary design mechanism involving a consensus of thoughts and feelings over more than one life time. I can see, not as a grand designer but as a significant designer, how both the Gaia theory and Jung's concepts of archetypes playing significant roles in the design of evolutionary development. These may not include the strongest science, but how scientific is the concept of allowing markets to determine social and political policy, because this has a lot to do with what science is funded and grows within our world today. A Buddhist's understanding of compassion and emptiness as the road to ultimate happiness at least approaches design from the prospective of intelligence and responsibility.

I want to point out that the understanding that although the Neo-conservative might be associated with the religious opposition to evolution, the principle that honors market based solutions to public policy questions is itself based on survival of the economically fittest. Monsanto power that allows it to continue to profit at the risk of global ecological disaster is tied to the Malthusian conclusion that humanity most always over-populate is that they are both tied to the understanding that markets and the competition for markets, that economy and that wealth most all grow. The understanding that profit is not only acceptable, not even only desirable, but a necessary component of advancing human welfare through myth of Progress as the manifest destiny of the evolutionarily advanced form of humanity. In a sense this is an intelligent but irresponsible design. It is making a decision based on the most immediate aspects of self-interest within the context of a social abstract concepts of wealth and money above the ecological balance on which most of life is dependent. I have sincere and deep concerns over how evolution and how science are taught in public school today. I would feel much more satisfied with a science education that produced students who understood basic concepts like controls, variables, samples, qualifiers, things that might allow them to determine if we have used up half the worlds oil or if the last election was stolen, then one in which evolution succeeded over intelligent design.

Elizabeth Parenti-Soba

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 01:37 | link | comments |
evolution, babylonian renaissance, kansas school board

email from a former Largo cadre
            A little while back a former cadre posted a email about largo in the xNatlfed list. As we are two of only a few cadre who have admitted participation in the closed section, and since it gives a unique and personal prospective on the closed section I requested permission to republish this letter on this blog. I hope to fill in some more with my own reflections, and invite other individuals who wish to speak on this subject to join in with thier own prospectives.

Hey,
      So Elizabeth and I have been discussing this half the summer, since the writer of "Bombshell" join the list saying much of what was said of Largo was a lie. (and yes Gino lied a hell of a lot, I knew this shortly after meeting him.) It's a complicated situation since not to many people are open about being part of the closed section, and it feels vulnerable hanging out thier alone. Elizabeth made a statement that Largo was more advanced than anything weather or the SLA had and Jeff promptly dismissed it with one of his stet lines on not being able to take the girl out of natlfed. I want to back her position up a little but it comes down to revealing more of my own role. Before I go on I want to be clear in pointing out that the organization and training of militias are a basic right define by the 2nd amendment of the bill of rights, and in such a contents the training of individuals in military skills is not in itself illegal, although any practical deployment of such a force may be seen as a crime.
       One of my positions within the party was senoir drill instructor for the closed section. My credentials for this included graduating at the top of my class and earning a meritorious promotion out of marine corps bootcamp, I also graduated near the top of my class in Non-commission officers school, and high marks in both Staff non-commission officers training and system of class instruction. This amounts to a fair amount of training given by an elite branch of the US military with the aim of being equiped to develope and run training programs to maintain essential military skills in enlisted personel. It is more than fair to say i had the credentials to run a professional level military training program. During my time in the organization I was involved in developing and implementating I beleave 6 differrent training programs at verious times and with various levels of success. As in I beleave everything in natlfed this was open to sabotage from Gino and others within the party leadership. However i would say that I succeeded in providing some level of professional military training to at least a dozen cadre, and thier where two I was particular proud of as having produced reliable soldiers. I am fairly confident that with two or three months I could have trained at least a platoon and perhaps a company of cadre up to regular military stadards. This may be very little in terms of the hundreds of thousands within the US military and yet it outways anything Weather or the SLA could have mustered.
        Before this some level of training was in effect under Gino. I have heard second hand about his training of GH, and I have to say that I was impressed with GH. It also should be understood that in military training, maintaining a rifle, being sure that it can function, somewhat outweighs the ability to shoot a rifle. This was an area Gino trained Polly and LA in and i think they where adequately enough trained.
          I think this, the idea of training cadre to regular military standards, was the concerned mentioned by the FBI in thier legal documents that the organization reached level of abilities beyond that ussually accomplished without foreign assitance.
           Something underlying this training was the ability to communicate to US military personnel on professional terms. Anyone  whose read 10 days that shook the world knows that the insurrection did not beat the russian military but rather won a significant number of soldiers and sailors  onto thier side. The organization in at least a few occassions began sending cadre into the US military both for professional training but also to begin learning to communicate effectively with members of the US military as workers. I want to mention something about one of the FBI informents mentioned in the files robin provided. He was one of the individuals I trained for a number of months when suddenly during an NLC I was notified that he was about to leave for basic training. I was given about 20 minutes to talk to him and provide him with any tips I could as to how to survive as a communist within the military culture. I was more than a little outraged. It was clear to me that neither I or Elizabeth had been informed that he was enlisting because Gino wanted him to be independent of the operation within the military we had been developing. I want you all to understand that working within the US military was a whole differrent scene than most of the organizing in natlfed, the legality of it always dependent on functioning within a grey area, and the fact that violence is a part of the military culture the danger of challenging the power of the state in this arena was very real. That kid should have been given access to every cadre who had made it so far for advice and instruction, beyond that how he enlisted and how he moved into the arena should have been done with the insights of people who new the military culture and knew how to minimize risk. As I talked to him i realized he was going in blindfolded because Gino wanted apparratus outside Elizabeth conrtol. Eventually NOC control of the bank account for Elizabeth organization allowed them to disrail it, mostly just to undermined us. To me the New Brunswick temporary workers stuff was the same. Gino Sabotaged BL, because if the offensive became successful BL would have a lot of real political power and Gino would not have had absolute control over it. In the end this was always the thing, if Gino could have made a revolution and come out on top he would have gone with it, but he was committed to controling the organization through NOC, without any real connection with the masses. Anyone doing something real developed a constituency outside the organization that threaten him because it meant they had power beyond the organizations interrior. The problem with Gino is that his having power always came first and that should have been obvious to anyone who was in the organization for more than two years. In every single arena, in every single fraction making anything real happen meant fighting Gino and NOC tooth and nail. From what I understand Ribar does not even have the past credentials Gino did ( and by the raid gino hadn't done any serious work building an exterrior constituency for almost a decade.) I imagine it is a dozen times worse.
       Sorry to get so emotional, it was something that often bothered me, that cadre being sent into the military underequiped because Gino was Jealous of his power. It was set up wrong from the begining, and I knew even when I was talking to him that he would not last very long before the government would be on top of him, I was not surpriced when I heard he went awol and i blamed it right then on Gino's jealousy over his power.

name withheld

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 21:31 | link | comments |

In Solidarity for a desperate act

Dearest friends and dearest Strangers,

On November 3^rd 2006^th Malachi Ritschers step out into Chicago's rush hour and lit himself on fire in protest of the war in Iraq. At first the world did not known the meaning of his protest, the sign he left behind only said “thou shall not kill”, but after a few days his suicide, a mission statement was discovered. http://www.savagesound.com/gallery99.htm In this statement he made clear that he had lived a full life, a life he was compelled to take because of the injustice of the war, expressing some small hope that his death may have an impact that will contribute to ending the many deaths that happen every day in Iraq. For the most part the US press has censored his story or coverage of his act that now a month latter and even most relatively well informed Americans remain ignorant of his act.

Many American's have a difficult time coming to grips with death, I have met some who very seriously want to live forever in a “back to Methuselah” sort of way. Without a draft most Americans escape the reality of US military aggression in a way that was impossible during Vietnam and still impossible for those economically pressured into the US “voluntary” military force. In the small college town I live in the anti-war movement is focusing on counter-recruitment campaign. At the locale high school an average of two students enlist a year, and I can't help comparing that to The High school I graduated from where about 50 kids would be enlisted before graduation and nearly a third would be enlisted by the end of the summer following their graduation. I seriously doubt the president takes a death in Iraq much more seriously than a death in the video game's he so likes to play, but how much more seriously do those standing politely on the corner with anti-war signs but refusing to stand in the way of business as usual. Many return to lives where for the rest of the week the war does not impact them at all, with no day to day reminder that our country is currently engaged in occupying two foreign country's resulting from the two wars we are still conducting. Self-immolation was a significant part of ending the Vietnam war, it was first done by Monks in South Vietnam but was eventually taken up by an american. Malachi's act is repugnant to many of American's anti-death “we value life” attitude, but how seriously can we be about this when we close our eyes to the reality that the US is recognized by most of our allies as the greatest threat to world peace. Malachi's act was extreme, and in his Mission statement he regrets having missed the opportunity to commit another act many American's would label extreme and insane. Historically the fewer who stand in the way of injustice the more extreme the stands of those few are forced to be. If even one third of the people who opposed the war as immoral refused to participate, refuse to work, the politicians would be forced to end the war. The timidity of the many to step out of line with authority may leave little but extremism or cynicism left, before dismissing the act of Malachi as irrational we must look rationally at what our nation is doing. George W. Bush lied to bring us to war, he has pursued a policy of aggression and approved policies that have led to war crimes. With two years left in his last term America is just going to let this war criminal finish out his term in the very vague hope that some future president will end the wars he has begun. Meanwhile there are soldiers and Marines in Iraq who where expecting to be out of the service but are still on tour in Iraq, many of them have turned to suicide in their despair. How much of reality is the average American ignoring in order to maintain a grip on reality. It is vanity and pride to dismiss another as crazy or cowardly from a position of ignorance or privileged or in some cases both. I urge others to read Malachi mission statement and spend at least a moment seriously considering what we can and what we must do to end the unjust war we as the aggressor nation continue to wage. Regardless of what our individual feelings or opinions are toward acts more extreme than we are comfortable with we must realize that if many of us, not even all just many, expand the envelope of what we can and will do to end an unjust war, the less pressure for more extreme acts will exist. We must do more than pass resolution we must be resolved to take a stand. Not just standing with a sign but standing with a side that confronts what we understand is wrong, we must be willing to boycott, strike, sit-in, blockade, and riot, we must each expand what we are capable of doing, as well as expand what we accept others will stand forward to do. We must at least share the level of solidarity that we will not allow the filter of the US media to allow Malachi's act to go unheard of by most Americans.

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 19:35 | link | comments |
iraq war, cut and run, anti-war, malachi ritschers

Election 2006
       Well it's been a while sine I've posted anything. I lot of my energy has been going toward efforts that would not benefit from on line presentation. While I might at some point catch up on these areas I think for now i'll just charge in with a non-sequaltor. I've been leafleting the polls for a CAGE meeting questioning the degree to which elections are stolen within the US. The idea behind the meeting is that accepting the reality of how easily electronic machines allow ellection results to be tampered with is a major paradigm shift for the US public conception of the legitamacy of the State. Even for those of us who are radicals and have not for years seen the act of coting as being particularly viable, thier has been an understanding that thier is a base line accountability at the polls, that beyond a certain point of contempt an incumbent  will face a backlash that might end his political career. With even a marginal ability to tamper with results, say a computer that changes in 20 votes, the power of petitioning ones government through phone calls and letters becomes somewhat muted. The impact of 12 people standing with signs on the sidewalk becomes much more trivial and the entire  package of a good and involved citizen becomes just window dressing to an illegitimate process of an entrenched and unjust state. Most modern americans come with a tremendous amount of denial baggage in light of a beleaf that thier system is the most just democratic system in the world. Taking a hard look at the evidence is something many people might need to do together in order to support themselves into accepting the terms of reality associated with stolen elections.
           The poll I am working is one I've leafletted a number of times. I have campiagned for green candidates, called for resignations and impeachments. I've come to know an african-american who has worked the poll for the democrats since the civil rights era. I've since visited his home and become something of a friend. His story is one of those many grass roots organizers whose fame has been modest but whose effect has been dear. During the civil rights era he register voters in poor black urban areas where many were afraid to go. In many areas of town it is still a tradition for african-americans to be registered to vote for the first time by him. Many people old and young, are use to seeing him at the polls ready to explaine the ballot and the issues on it on election day. Today the republican party has decided to give out sample ballots on the same paper stock and the same color as the democratic sample ballot. It seemed a pretty open attempt to by the republicans to fool some voters. My friend was pretty forth right, when he saw someone unknowingly get a republican sample ballot to speak out from accross the parking lot that they had the wrong ballot, and walk up quickly to explaine what he meant.
         I can imagine the rationalizing done by some people taking on this tactic. One that says that if someone doesn't understand the issues and is just voting the way someone else tells them maybe thier vote is open game to such a deception. With my objections to the DLC I have often come to a frustrating point in dealing with people who without discrimination support the democratic party without criticism. The reality is that as a formula to vote, voting one party over another is not without merit, and taking the advice of people you've come to trust is something that is older than history.  How strong and how corrupt is the rational that OK dismissing another persons vote. In Ohio the mail in ballots for likely the first time in history required extra postage, thier was some attempt to let these votes go uncounted. The question is one of inclusion rather than exclusion. Most people are not aware that in many states X-felons have the right to vote- but fear tactics have been employed to intimidate X-felons and even non-felons who where being unjustly accused of being felons in order to prevent them from voting. Thier is a problem within a democracy when a political affiliation invest itself in disenfranchising others. Right now the indications seem that we might be having our 6th year of stolen elections, we need to start looking at what this means to our society.

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 19:16 | link | comments |

Tipping point found in thawing peatbog
           Tomsk State University scientist Sergie Kirpotin's discovery of a thawing million square kilometer peatbog, frozen for the past 11,000 years, is the latest tipping point to alarm the worlds scientific community. A tipping point is a sensitive area where a small temperture increase will result in a dramatic change in the enviorment that triggers a greater increase in global warming. This large western Siberian peatbog, which has been frozen since the end of the last Ice age, is just such a tipping point. The peatbog has been producing methane for 11,000 years, but while it has been part of the permafrost most of that gas has been frozen. As the area thaws this large reserve of methane, estimated at 70 billion tons or 1/4 of the worlds methane, is being released into the atmosphere where it increases global warming resulting in more of the bog melting and more gas being released. The result is a cycle of acceleration that having been started is likely irreversible.  It is estimated that the effect of the thawing peatbog will increase the rate of global warming by 10% to 25%.

Elizabeth Parenti-Soba
       

posted by: EzizabethParentiSoba at 15:52 | link | comments |
global warming

Template by motime.com  |  header image credit: Markus Gann © www.begann.de