
AB ABSURDO
80's Recommended Reading
Links
from Number 80
Backwards Glances Index
2005 part 3
A word of
warning - owing to the Weekly Glance's attempted topicality some of the links
below may be even more ephemeral than usual. (Tip - a search for cached versions
of missing sites is often productive using either
Google or The
Internet Archive Way
Back Machine.)
April 1st 2005
Fox Hunting
April 3rd 2005
Begging Voice
April 5th 2005
Darfur and the Culture of Life
April 7th 2005
The Company You Keep
April 9th 2005
Hari's Game
April 11th 2005
Of Teacups and Intolerance
April 14th 2005
Beetle Honor
April 17th 2005
Beijing Backfire?
April 20th 2005 Faith-Based
Electioneering
April 24th 2005
Deya's Day of Reckoning
April 27th 2005
Unhealthy Influences
April 30th 2005
Plagiarize
May 2nd 2005
Holy Omerta
May 4th 2005
21st Century Delusion
May 5th 2005
Cross Dilemma
May 7th 2005
Vanquished Virgin
May 9th 2005
Bananas in Kansas
May 11th 2005
Ultra Drivel
May 17th 2005
Galloway Bites
May 19th 2005
Shredded Parsley
May 20th 2005
Stephen In Wonderland
May 21st 2005
CLOOB!
May 23rd 2005
PABAAH
May 26th 2005 Journalism?
No! Uncritical Plug? Yes!
May 28th 2005
Medium Ghoul
May 30th 2005
Nessie's Gnasher
June 2nd 2005
Smithsonian Institute Blues
June 3rd 2005
Peace One Day
June 4th 2005
Possessed by Superstition
June 7th 2005
African Shame
June 9th 2005
Bible Bashing
June 11th 2005 Legislative
Lunacy
June 18th 2005 Not
So Fast
June 20th 2005
ID = Intelligent Dutch
June 21st 2005
The Exorcist
June 23rd 2005
PBS
June 24th 2005
No Account Bigots
June 27th 2005
The Wages of Hinn
June 30th 2005
Tiny Tom and the Aliens
Fox Hunting - when it comes to
impartial, fair and balanced news reporting one name that certainly does not
spring to mind is Rupert Murdoch's Fox News. This is not just 80's opinion, but
one that is shared by
many folk - including Sam Kimery. He has
invented the "FOX
Blocker" a nifty little gadget that you can fit to your TV to keep it
clean of that particular contagion. It appears that Kimery, along with most
rational, sentient beings decided that Fox news output was right-wing
propaganda, a view also shared by FOX Blocker co-founder Joshua Montgomery. He
states "We don't believe in censorship." on the
Blocker website
and adds "I don't have a problem with FOX News. If they
would just come out and say that it is rightwing news for right wing nuts
(wingnuts) we will take this site down and move on." An added kicker when
you buy a FOX Blocker is that "With every order placed,
FOXBlocker.com will send an e-mail in your name to the TOP 10 advertisers at FOX
News letting them know that yet another subscriber has opted out of FOX News.
With a little luck and a lot of volume, we can shut the FOX up!"
Naturally this has upset the fair-minded, impartial and balanced individuals who
get their worldview from Fox. Montgomery answers them thus,"All
you hate mailers out there (750 or so today) quit sending me "CNN, MSNBC, ABC,
CBS, NPR and the BBC are left wing liberal hippies......." without EVIDENCE. If
you are going to send it, send it with FACTS......Just saying it makes you sound
like the stupid, ignorant, uneducated hillbilly you are." Neither Kimery
or Montgomery are making any money out of this - they just want to make a point
- any profits, should they materialize, will be donated to
FAIR.org,
MediaMatters.org
or Lawrence Freenet. If you have $8.95 burning a hole in your pocket get a FOX
Blocker and send a message to Fox.
Miracle
Babies - the
long-running saga continues. Now the latest
twist in the Gilbert Deya Miracle Babies scandal involves Deya's right hand man
in the UK, pastor Benjamin Mensah, who
stoutly defended Deya when the accusations of
baby-smuggling started flying. Now it seems that Mensah has had enough of trying
to defend the indefensible and has resigned from Gilbert Deya Ministries. Deya
is reported
here in the East African Standard as showing
little Christian charity toward his former deputy saying "...good
riddance as he had been a disgrace to the Church". He went on to say "I'm
not interested in fighting wars through litigation. I'm a man of God and there
is nothing to worry about." The only real mystery in all of this is why
this "man of God" is still in the UK and not deported to Kenya where the police
are anxious to talk with him about his activities.
A Glass
Cathedral - it is a well-known truism that in a debate or dispute when
one party begins
comparing the other to Nazis any rational
discussion flies out of the window and the discourse deteriorates into abuse.
Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor, in attacking women's right to choose in the
matter of abortion has unwisely chosen to play the Nazi card. Unwisely because
it not only illustrates the poverty of his argument but also because it brings
the focus sharply onto the history of his own church. The Roman Catholics at the
top of the hierarchy have always been known for their often cosy relationship
with fascists - unlike many priests at the lower end of the scale who suffered
for their opposition to oppression. Whether it was accommodating
Hitler,
Mussolini,
Franco or more recently, criminals such as
Augusto Pinochet the Roman Catholic church with
its unelected and authoritarian hierarchy has shown an affinity for repressive
fascist governments. Murphy O'Connor, who is already damned in 80's eyes as a
paedophile-shifting hypocrite, has managed to
sink even lower with his Nazi mudslinging. Those who live in glass cathedrals
should be very careful indeed not to start throwing stones. (For more on the
Catholic churches links with political authorities
this page makes interesting reading.)
April 3rd 2005
Begging
Voice - a bigot rattles the collecting box for your money. Not much, just
a mere £75,000, in order to allow Christian Voice (CV) to pursue its
blasphemy case against the BBC for showing
Jerry Springer - the Opera. So goes a begging letter, (in pdf) that can be
downloaded from the CV website (and kindly made available in html by
Mediawatchwatch. The writer, the sainted Green
the Baptist himself, even tries to answer a question that 80 (and many many
others) has asked about his protests, which is "Can't God
look after Himself?". Green thinks not, although he feels obliged to say
"In truth, God could have struck the BBC electrical system
with a thunderbolt as we prayed. He chose not to." How does Green know
this? Did the old boy tell him personally? Perhaps the big G is saving his
thunderbolts for Green himself, to punish him for his arrogant assumption that
he speaks for the deity. No, Green has a different answer, but equally silly. "I
believe God is generous enough to involve ordinary believing men and women, with
all our weaknesses, in His purpose. He wants us to share His victory. He
graciously desires fellowship with us." Including such weaknesses as the
aforementioned arrogance. On the subject of arrogance, Green has something to
say about it himself, in response to his own rhetorical question " Shouldn't we just forgive those responsible for Springer?"
He pays lipservice to the idea of forgiveness for, after all, " I dearly want my trespasses forgiven!" (These no
doubt would be the trespasses of homophobic bigotry and bullying a cancer
charity, to name just a couple.) What he is actually saying is that we should
forgive those who trespass against us, not out of kindness or understanding but
for our own benefit, "...not least because only then will
God forgive us our trespasses." So, you forgive only in order to be able
to get away with (be forgiven for) some trespasses of your own. How very moral.
But the twist comes when Green says that we can forgive those who have slighted
us, but not those who have slighted others. For "...when
that sin is against the Lord Jesus, what arrogance it would be for us to forgive
on His behalf!" And what arrogance it is to condemn on his behalf. Let's
be optimistic, this could be a breakthrough - Green at least understands the
concept of arrogance - given enough time he may even realize just how much it
applies to him and his crude and offensive zealotry. Meanwhile, in the real
world, the BBC governors have
vindicated the producers of Springer the Opera
- although irritatingly this report still repeats the ridiculously inflated
numbers for emails received by the BBC in protest. It is technically a fairly
trivial exercise to flood an address with duplicated emails - numbers received
should not be taken as an indication of the actual number of complainants.
Ark of
the Covenant Discovered in Israel - see
here for this amazing story which has parallels
with the Oded Golan/James Ossuary affair. "An amazing
archaeological discovery has been made in Israel, one that could potentially
shake the world of antiquities to its core and signal the upcoming bloodbath of
Armageddon, according to Biblical experts. Indeed, what appears to be the Ark of
the Covenant referred to in the Old Testament has surfaced in, of all places,
the private collection of a longtime antiquities dealer." (thanks to the
excellent
Explorator)
Dumb
Quote of the Day - the struggle to keep US schools' science classes
unblemished by religion continues unabated. This
particular skirmish in Dover, Pennsylvania has
been dragging on for a while now as religionists campaign for the teaching of
evolution to be replaced by fairy tales. The same tired arguments are trotted
out once more about Darwin's Theory being "just
a theory". To many of these religionists theory means little
more than a guess - they cannot quite get their heads around what theory
actually means in science "A well-substantiated
explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted
knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set
of phenomena." (WordWeb)
Now and again something slips out that illustrates quite how ignorant these
fundamentalists are, and epitomises just what this struggle is all about. Pastor
and parent Ray Mummert, surely unintentionally, put his finger on the real
problem when he said, "Christians are a lot more bold
under Bush's leadership, he speaks what a lot of us believe. We've been attacked
by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." Which by
implication means, in the black and white terms so beloved of the
fundamentalists, that Mummert and chums are the stupid, ignorant segment of the
culture. Now this is hardly news, but it is nice to have it confirmed by the
good pastor. (Much thanks to Gerald Gluch for the heads up. Read Paul Krugman in
the
New York Times (reg rqd) for a reminder that
schools science and the Terri Schiavo case are but two fronts in a much wider,
and increasingly dangerous and dirty war.)
April
5th 2005
Darfur
and the Culture of Life - the UN security council has voted to refer war
crimes suspects involved in the government-enabled murder, rape and torture in
Darfur, Sudan to the
International Criminal Court (ICC). About
bloody time too - at last the US managed to get over its fear of supporting the
court in The Hague by abstaining in the vote along with China, Algeria and
Brazil. Strange company for the Bush administration and its "culture
of life" but at least things may get moving now and this horrible
ordeal for the people of Darfur will end. Anne Patterson, US deputy ambassador
to the UN is
quoted by the BBC as saying "It
is important that the international community speak with one voice in order to
help promote effective accountability." which is pretty rich considering
it was the US that held things up over referral to the ICC in the first place.
80 wonders how many more folk will have been killed because of Bush's
prevarication and paranoia. Early last month 80
quoted Captain Brian Steidle on the atrocities
in Darfur perpetrated by the Janjaweed militia. Steidle, a former US Marine who
was a ceasefire monitor for the African Union
tells of his tour of duty in the UK
Independent,"In the six months I spent in Darfur as a
"ceasefire observer", I saw entire villages burned down with Sudanese locked
inside their huts. I saw villagers with their eyes or ears plucked out, or men
who had bled to death after being castrated. I interviewed women who had been
gang-raped while out collecting firewood." Culture of life? Don't make me
sick. Bush and cronies make a loud enough noise over the Terri Schiavo case and
other causes dear to right-wing conservative Christian voters, but the lives of
the people of Darfur are obviously not so important. You may ask how come 80
singles out the US and not China, Algeria or Brazil, the other abstainers?
Because 80, perhaps foolishly, expected better of the United States. What the
hell have they been doing since September last year, when then Secretary of
State Colin Powell
called what was happening in Darfur genocide?
The US administration's hypocrisy sits well next to the outraged squealing of
the Sudan government in
this report from Islam Online.
Naked
Fear - when John Ashcroft let his
nipplephobia get the better of him (they keep following me round the
room) and had the nude statues in the Great Hall of the Justice Department's
headquarters draped at the taxpayers' expense 80 thought he was a uniquely sad
little man. This was wrong - he is not unique after all, he has a soulmate in
the form of Frank Butler, a zoning inspector for Bartholomew County, Indiana.
Butler
has ordered that classical-style statues at
White River Truck Repair and Yard Art be moved out of the public view. Asked
why, this silly little official said, "They have nudity
... and that should not be in the view of a minor." It seems Indiana's
obscenity law prohibits the display of nudity where children might see it. You
wonder about the moral danger breastfed babies must be in - unless you blindfold
them at dinnertime of course. To be honest, it is unfair to have a go at Butler
as he is only doing his job - the two creeps that complained to his department
in the first place are the real weirdos.
April 7th 2005
The
Company You Keep - can say a lot about you. 80
often employs this maxim when looking at, say, a website that makes health
claims that appear questionable or unsubstantiated. Just check the other sites
that this site links to, and you can get a feeling for where they are coming
from. This assessment by association can work in other areas, such as capital
punishment. A recent
Amnesty International report has found that "During
2004, more than 3,797 people were executed in 25 countries and at least 7,395
were sentenced to death in 64 countries.." Of course this only includes
recorded, judicial executions as opposed to widespread, coordinated murders
taking place right now in places like Dafur. Also many countries announce a much
smaller number than other evidence would lead one to expect, such as global
leader in executions, China. According to the Amnesty report "China
executed at least 3,400 people, but sources inside the country have estimated
the number to be near 10,000." On the other hand it does also strike a
hopeful note, saying that there is a "..worldwide trend
towards abolition..." but also stresses the "..ongoing
need for concerted action by the international community to consign the death
penalty to history." This BBC page helpfully publishes a
graph of the top six countries in the world judicial murders league -
and it is here that the "company you keep" exercise can be employed. In
decreasing order of executions are China, Iran, Vietnam,
US,
Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Strange company indeed for a country like the US,
with a president who blathers on about a "culture of life"........
On the bottom words are shallow.
On the surface talk is cheap.
You can only judge the distance by the company you keep
Gone But
Not Forgotten - all over the world the late Pope is being eulogized in
such adulatory terms that 80 thought it only fair to mention some of his
achievements that have gone strangely unremarked. Damage to the environment
caused by the increase in human population, a population in many countries
forbidden contraception by this man. Thousands dead and dying from HIV AIDS
because they were forbidden to use condoms by this man. Unknown numbers of women
dead or seriously injured in backstreet abortion clinics because abortion was
forbidden by this man. Thousands of children abused by the Catholic priesthood,
a scandal never fully acknowledged by this man. Gays and lesbians worldwide
condemned as "... part of a new ideology of evil"
by this man. Even now, the old autocrat's work is still not done, although he
himself is dead. He has packed the Conclave of Cardinals with men possessing the
same stern conservative views as himself, thereby doing his best to ensure his
successor will be in the same mold. (To emphasise business as usual, Cardinal
Law, who resigned as Archbishop of Boston in 2002 following accusations that he
covered up sexual abuse of children by priests, will be leading a memorial mass
for the dead pope. A support group for the victims of priestly abuse will be
there, armed with leaflets. This BBC
report reminds us "In
February 2004, a report commissioned by the Church said more than 4,000 US Roman
Catholic priests had faced sexual abuse allegations in the previous 50 years, in
cases involving more than 10,000 children - mostly boys.")
April 9th 2005
Hari's
Game - 80 has mentioned Johann Hari and his sane and rational articles
before. Now, in common with the rest of the world (or so it seems) he has
written about the late
Karol Wojtyla. He
suggests that despite all the excessive adulation for the man he will be seen
eventually in the same light as one of his predecessors, Pope Pius XII, as "a
deeply malign force". Hari's articles are archived on his website
here,
and are definitely worth reading. Almost as interesting, however, are the
discussions that follow further down the page - although 80 doubts whether some
of the contributors are quite what they claim to be. There is one particular
correspondent who so fits the profile for a right-wing, religious, homophobic
twit that he must surely be a caricature. Anyone that manages to defend the
likes of Franco and Pinochet, (they kept those godless commies/socialists in
check) and simultaneously maintain an irritating holier-than-thou attitude has
to be a fake or a nutter. Here is an example of this person's thinking on the
church's
condom/AIDS lies, "Condoms
are a perversion of sexual intercourse, which is intended for procreation. In
discrediting condoms, the Church was not attempting to spread disease, but
rather to emphasise that the one truly acceptable course is in fact to abstain
from sexual activity altogether, outside of marriage. That message is
theologically sound and it is the surest way to prevent disease. The Church is
not in the business of advocating condoms as a second-best strategy, because
second-best doesn't cut it with God." The thought that this person,
assuming they are for real, is out there walking the streets is too worrying to
contemplate. There are also those whose postings give 80 the old "I wished I had
said that" feeling, a mixture of admiration and jealousy. One of the papal
apologists' favorite, and poorly substantiated, claims to absolve Wojtyla in
spite of his awful record (see Gone But
Not Forgotten) is that he spoke out against communism (mild version)
or singlehandedly brought the Berlin wall crashing down (loony version). As
Phil, another contributor says, "..even a broken clock
tells the correct time twice a day". The last word is Hari's, looking at
the catalog of Wojtyla's achievements and the nauseating obsequiousness of his
funeral rites and tributes, "If we want to talk about
respecting the dead, today we should grieve not for one peddler of superstition,
but for the tens of thousands who - thanks to him - did not live to see this
day. I do not believe John Paul II will face a Judgement Day in "Heaven". But
one day, the fatuous tributes of the past week will rot, and his name will be
cursed here on earth."
Funereal
Flummery - here is an
excellent piece by Polly Toynbee (in the
Guardian) expressing disgust at the world leaders fawning over a corpse in Rome
today. As 80 has attempted below,
Toynbee adds a desperately-needed counterbalance to the crawling coverage in the
media of Karol Wojtyla and his legacy. As Toynbee so eloquently puts it, " Today's saccharine sanctimony will try to whiten the
sepulchre of yet another Pope whose obscurantist faith has caused pointless
suffering; it is no defence that he was only obeying higher orders."
TV Ghost
Frauds - well worth a look is Tony Youens'
Commentary on the stupid TV ghost/psychic shows, in particular the
fatuous "Most
Haunted Live". In
Psychic Dumbing Down Tony asks the question, how may health and
safety legislation apply to ghostly "hazards" featured in this show, which is
described in the publicity blurb as "...terrifying"
and comes away with some interesting observations. The unwelcome spread of such
shows has as much to do with the cheapness of production as with the gullibility
and ignorance of the target audience. A low light camera system, some
"performers" and a bucket load of bullshit and you are there.
April 11th 2005
Of
Teacups and Intolerance - sometimes what appears to be a storm in a
teacup can presage something far more serious. Take the row going on in the
English village of Lyneham in Wiltshire. What seems to have started it was Mitch
Hawkin's website
www.lynehamvillage.co.uk - or more particularly
his references to the late Pope and a spoof ad that he ran for a successor.
Hawkin's comments strike 80 as amusing and also to the point - "Fancy
a new job? The Vatican is now looking for a new Pope now that the current one
has snuffed it. Let's hope the next Pope can do a better job. Better still, why
not abolish the position of Pope, as religion, at the end of the day, causes
more wars than anything else." Certainly nothing offensive here in 80's
view, but that view is not shared by another village resident, one Andy Humm,
who coincidentally has his own, rather more conventional and sedate website
www.lynehamvillage.com. Not only does Humm think Hawkin's site "shames"
Lyneham he
told the Guardian "What
Mr Hawkin has said about the Pope is disgusting and outrageous. Mr Hawkin should
be charged." (Perhaps Humm should have look at Number 80 if he wants to
fret about disrespectful coverage of the dead Pope) It seems Humm and a local
Tory councillor, Allison Bucknell, are keen for Hawkin to be served an
Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) for daring
to mock Wojtyla. The Wiltshire police are said to be investigating. The first
observation to make is to wonder whether some of Humm's spluttering outrage is
owed to the fact his site visitor numbers have likely dipped - the publicity
about the threatened ASBO has no doubt boosted Hawkin's site instead. But aside
from the amusement to be had from this, let's face it, petty squabble, there is
an important principle at stake. Just because Hawkin has not joined in the
nauseating adulatory coverage of the late Wojtyla, but rather expressed, via
humor, his opinion of the whole religious circus, should he be gagged? Certainly
not. If not given enough scrutiny and opposition Humm and Bucknell might
actually succeed in making an ASBO do the job of the (currently shelved)
religious hatred law. The idea of these little Englanders dictating what one can
or cannot say is in itself "disgusting and outrageous"
and should not be permitted to happen. Even if you don't find Hawkin's pages
particularly funny, visit his site and show your support. Voltaire's (possibly
apocryphal) saying, "I disapprove of what you say, but I
will defend to the death your right to say it" definitely applies here.
The use of an ASBO to stifle free speech could well be the thin end of a very
nasty wedge. (Thanks to
New Humanist for the heads-up on this)
Top Marks
for Cain - in the left margin of this page you will find many interesting
and useful links, this is the story of one of them. A long time ago, in a galaxy
far away, The View from Number 80 started life as a space advocacy page - as you
can see it has changed a lot since then, although a vestige of the original
purpose still exists further down this page - see
Case For Space. Also mentioned on this site since its inception is an
internet newsletter called
Universe Today, (UT) which is also the source
of the syndicated Space News that 80 still runs. Universe Today, now well past
its 1000th edition, is the brainchild of Fraser Cain. It has grown over the
years from a plain text newsletter to the illustrated, professional product we
see today. Apart from running space news and releases, these days UT offers high
quality downloadable desktop images and original interviews, book reviews and
ads for space-related businesses, an indexed archive from 1999 and a lively
forum on a number of space-related topics. Now Cain is running an experiment in
Podcasting, (an audio file, usually MP3, that can be downloaded for listening to
either on your pc or a portable player when you want). To kick off the service
is a short interview with Scott Gaudi at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for
Astrophysics about Sedna's lack of a moon. (Sedna
is a recently-discovered planetoid three times farther away from Earth than
Pluto, and named for an Inuit goddess). To check out the podcast, catch up on
space news, discuss space and astronomy, find out how to run Space News on your
own site, and enjoy Cain's occasional wry humor, cut along to
Universe Today
- highly recommended. (Update - UT now has an RSS
link to which you can subscribe so that you will automatically hear show
updates. For more information visit UT)
Mourners and
Shakers - my, what a wonderful place the papal
funeral was for bringing people together - there was Prince Charles shaking
hands with the dictator of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe and, even more touching,
Iranian President Mohammad Khatami and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad shook
hands with Israeli President Moshe Katsav. Sadly the warm glow shed on it all by
this
Reuter's report fails to mention that Charles
claims he was "caught
by surprise" (pre-nuptial jitters maybe?) and Khatami
denies any of it ever happened. Syria does not deny a handshake took
place but "this did not change Syria's position on the
Jewish state." Officially they are still at war with each other.
Sigh..............
April 14th 2005
Beetle
Honor - here is an amusing little
item - Two former Cornell University
entomologists, Quentin Wheeler and Kelly Miller have been busy naming new
species of slime mold beetles and have chosen some striking names for three of
them. These unfortunate little critters have been named for George W Bush, Dick
Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. When asked why, the scientists said it was out of
admiration for the principles (?) of the three gentlemen and not because the
beetles looked like them. As if anyone would assume otherwise.......
Promises To
Keep - here is an op-ed in the
New York Times (reg rqd) from Kofi Annan,
secretary general of the UN, on the pledges made recently by donor countries to
aid those suffering in Sudan and particularly in Darfur. It is one thing to
promise aid - it is another thing to keep the promise. As Annan points out "...in
1992, donors pledged $880 million for Cambodian war rehabilitation; three years
later, only $460 million had been delivered. Nearly a year after donors promised
$1 billion to deal with the devastation caused by the 2003 earthquake in Bam,
Iran, less than 20 percent of the money had been delivered." He also
reminds us that monetary aid is useless without an end to the atrocities still
being committed every day. The sooner the Janjaweed and their government backers
stand trial for their actions the better. Meanwhile President Bush's hopelessly
inappropriate and insulting nominee for ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, is
having a hard time attempting, and failing, to justify his past contemptuous
remarks about the institution. Bolton is also tainted by his politicizing of
information and fighting to keep blatant inaccuracies in a speech on Cuba's
weapons program. This was attempted by intimidating those who felt adherence to
the truth was still important, even within the Bush administration. A former
intelligence chief, Carl Ford, described Bolton as ""kiss-up,
kick-down sort of guy", who tried to bully government analysts into producing
the intelligence he wanted." according to the
Guardian. Sadly the general feeling is that
Bolton will get the job - if so, it will be the equivalent of Bush and his
neocons giving the UN the finger - yet again.
April 17th 2005
Beijing
Backfire? - nothing in China happens on the public stage without
government approval and/or backing. This should be borne in mind when reading
news reports of
angry Chinese crowds protesting outside
Japanese embassies and businesses. The ostensible reason is outrage at Japan's
refusal to fully acknowledge the (very genuine) abuses of all kinds perpetrated
by them during the
invasion and occupation of part of China in the
late 1930s, although the real reason is more likely Japan's acknowledgement of
Taiwan and also its declaration of
oil and gas drilling rights in an area of the
China Sea claimed by both powers. If the Chinese government wanted to stop say,
the 10,000 people protesting in Shenzhen they could probably do so, after all,
just think
Tiananmen Square, but at what cost?. Times have
changed and the old men who run China had better proceed with caution - having
allowed such mass assemblies for their own purposes they may not like the next
target of the people's wrath - it could very well be themselves. Turning a
communist command economy into a capitalist one capable of trading on the world
stage is a ticklish process, and one that could so easily run away from them. As
the affluent inhabitants of places like the bubbling capitalist enclave of
Shanghai are enviously eyed by the much poorer
and less-favored bulk of the huge population, things could turn very nasty
indeed. Orchestrating street demonstrations against the Japanese is a weapon
that could very easily backfire, with disastrous results for the old Communist
hard men.
The God
Who Wasn't There - as regular readers know 80 often makes use of Robert
Carroll's The Skeptic's
Dictionary - there is a permanent link to this excellent site in the
left margin of this page. (The dictionary is also available as a regular book
and also an ebook). In addition to this, Carroll produces a free newsletter
which is always full of information on the strange events and beliefs in the
news - plus a healthy shot of humor. The latest issue reached 80 the other day
and as ever it is full of good stuff - you can sign up for your copy
here.
Among the items was a notice of a new movie to be released on DVD, entitled "The
God Who Wasn't There". Why straight to DVD? Can you really imagine
movie theaters in the US trying to run this, particularly in those states where
Imax movies that mention evolution are
unwelcome? Due out June 6th, the movie,
directed by ex-Christian fundamentalist Brian Flemming looks at the Christ myth
theory. Although there is nothing really new here to those that have kept up
with modern biblical scholarship, archaeology and history most of the material
will come as a complete revelation (to coin a phrase) to those who have never
really questioned the story handed out by churches and enshrined in the gospels.
Even the view of Jesus as a purely mythic figure has been around for a long
time. According to the ad, "The God Who Wasn't There" will feature "...interviews
and special commentary tracks with: Richard Dawkins (A Devil's Chaplain), Sam
Harris (The End of Faith), Richard Carrier (Sense and Goodness Without God),
Alan Dundes (Holy Writ as Oral Lit), Earl Doherty (The Jesus Puzzle), Robert
Price (The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man) and many others." Dawkins,
Carrier, and Doherty have often been mentioned in 80's pages and their presence
bodes well for the movie. Earl Doherty in particular has uncovered a mass of
convincing evidence that argues for the ahistoricity of Jesus, and which is
available on his outstanding website,
The Jesus Puzzle and also in book form. How
will religionists react to the movie? Some will ignore it, some will denounce it
as satanic and many more will put their figures in their ears and chant "I am
not listening, I am not listening...." Throwing over a comfortable belief that
tells you that you are somehow special because of your faith cannot be an easy
thing to do - let's hope the movie will help a few brave folk make the leap into
reality. As the US continues what seems to be an inexorable slide towards
theocracy it is truly heartening that Flemming has the guts to to go against the
tide.
April 20th 2005
Faith-Based Electioneering - the general election
campaign is in full swing in the UK and many secularists are concerned at how
far the three main political parties are prepared to go in order to court the
religious voters - or what they perceive to be religious voters. One example
that worries those who believe that religion does not belong in the classroom is
the way the big three all promise the expansion of faith schools, with the
Tories in particular promising "perhaps thousands".
Their education spokesman, Tim Collins says that Christian, Jewish and Islamic
schools have higher standards and a stronger ethos than secular schools. Quite
how accurate this claim is and whether it has anything with the ability of these
schools to choose only promising pupils is not mentioned. Collins goes on in a
quite scandalous and inaccurate fashion, blaming "..decades
of departure from faith and family.." for drug misuse and abortions, and
"..feral, scavenging youngsters preying on the old and
vulnerable." according to this
BBC report. This kind of scaremongering
nonsense seems to be the way this election campaign is being conducted, at least
by the Tories and Labour. That Collins can get away with this drivel is
astounding - especially his idiotic assertion that "Faith
schools do not divide communities, they brought people together." Try
telling that to anyone in Northern Ireland. The very fact that the each of the
three religions Collins cites claims that it alone is the true faith is divisive
right from the start. This imbecile then goes on to say that faith schools "....
are among the few places where the young can seek out answers to the really big
questions - not who will win Pop Idol but what is the purpose of my life and
what happens after my death." To attempt an answer to such questions
needs not more more schools peddling superstition but an addition to the
curriculum of lessons on ethics, philosophy and critical thinking. History
shows us that filling student's heads with
religious fairy tales is not the way to go - especially if this fool Collins is
an example of the sort of person such schools turn out. Despite recent
declarations to keep religion out of the election campaign it is right in there
- what else is all this faith schools nonsense about but religious
electioneering? For UK voters interested in their local candidates' views on
matters religious take a look
here - if you cannot see your area represented,
email your local parliamentary hopefuls, find out their views and submit them to
the site. For an earlier piece reflecting 80's disgust at UK political parties
toadying to unrepresentative faith groups see
Faith Works? It also points out exactly how
unpleasant some of these churches are.
Proctology News - a short while back 80 wrote about the
unpleasant activities of the nuttier end of the
alternative medicine world and in particular a nitwit called Bolen. Here you can
read the
latest ravings from this thoroughly unpleasant
and deluded individual who attempts to portray the actions of those concerned
about the dangers of quackery as part of a giant conspiracy (while you are there
check the links at the top of the page - can we say nutters? Yes, I think we
can.). This latest piece is similar to others in that yet another great victory
is claimed over the Quackbuster's conspiracy. With so many victories under his
belt you would think Bolen could retire from his labors - unless of course his
victories are as delusional as his conspiracies. This clownish, self-described "consumer
advocate" and his sad little crusades on behalf of the indefensible would
be funny, apart from the fact that he also spreads malicious lies about
responsible physicians. If you hear of a new miraculous medical treatment that
sounds too good to be true, do yourself a favor, check with these websites
Quackwatch,
the Quackfiles,
HealthWatcher
and HealthWatch
UK. One last point - why proctology news? Just think where Bolen's
head is........... (Update - it has been said that
Bolen's advocacy is the kiss of death for any cause he espouses - an observation
that is confirmed
yet again. 80 may be picky, but having a state
medical board rule that the object of Bolen's misplaced affections is a "serious
threat" to public health does seem to be a bit of a setback.)
April 24th 2005
Deya's
Day of Reckoning - cannot be far off. 80 has been following the story
of self-styled archbishop Gilbert Deya and the "miracle babies" scandal since
August of last year. Deya boasted that he could miraculously cause sterile,
barren and post-menopausal women to have babies through his intercession or as
the BBC described his claim at the time, "he can
exorcise demons from women who have passed the menopause or who are infertile"
. The only snag was that the women, members of Deya's congregation in Britain,
would have to travel to Kenya to give birth. It was then that things began to
unravel for Deya and his confederates as the Kenyan authorities investigated
and accusations of baby-smuggling were voiced. Deya, still in Britain, has
maintained his innocence in a most extraordinary fashion, cursing his
accusers, apparently believing that his increasingly unhinged outbursts were
sufficient to quiet investigations - see here for 80 on the
Miracle Babies story as it unfolded. Now the
BBC have returned to the subject, having originally featured Deya in a radio
show called
A "Cure" for Infertility last year and
still available online
here. Tomorrow, Friday 22nd April at
12:04 pm "...we'll be hearing new evidence on the UK
based Gilbert Deya Ministry and its links to child trafficking - currently the
focus of police investigations both here and in Kenya." on the You and
Yours show. This can be listened to over the web on
BBC Radio 4 as it goes out and will be available afterwards on the
You and Yours
web page. (This is a classic example of how
the faithful can be perfect targets for fraud - making use of their undoubted
gullibility. Also see
Faithful Forfeit
and
Costly Blind Faith for more examples.)
New Pope
Shock - in a startling departure from the ways of the past the Conclave
of Cardinals have chosen an old, white, European man to be the next Pope. Who
would have thought it?
A
Relative, Perhaps? - after hearing the
unwelcome news that the pontiff's mastiff, the
deeply conservative Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (see
Panzerkardinal) is at the front of the running
for the job of boss of the Roman Catholic church, 80 was somewhat cheered to
read this description of someone who must be relative of his, courtesy of
Private Eye
magazine. "Joseph Ratpoison, 79, Archbishop of Warfarino.
A noted hardline liberal, with profoundly conservative views on issues ranging
from abortion to women priests, Ratpoison is a noted linguist, speaking 17
languages, including Croatian, Walloon and Klingon."
April
27th 2005
Unhealthy Influences - unhealthy for free speech and unhealthy for
democracy. Catherine Bennett in the Guardian looks at the unprecedented
attempts by religious groups to influence the UK general election in a
piece rather hopefully entitled "How
atheists can swing this spiritual election". In this largely
secular country the religionists, perhaps taking comfort from George
Bush's re-election, seem determined to stick their oars in wherever and
whenever possible. What is more worrying is that the leaders of the three
main political parties seem more than happy to court this small and
unrepresentative portion of the electorate (see
Faith Works?
and Faith-based Electioneering).
Bizarrely, it would appear that the influence of these church groups with
politicians grows in inverse proportion to their shrinking congregations.
The media for the most part are happy to play along with this farce as
though the fact that these people believe in something they are incapable
of proving deserves some kind of respect. (To paraphrase the Beatles' Hey
Bulldog, "What makes you think you're something
special when you pray?") Why this should be so is a mystery and
seems to apply to no other walk of life. Bennett's suggestion is to take a
leaf out of the religionist's book and ask parliamentary candidates
searching questions to bring out their views on certain contentious
matters. Such excellent queries as "How would you defend the state-funding
of faith-based education?" and "Where do you stand on therapeutic cloning?
If it leads to effective treatments, should a member of Opus Dei ever be
allowed to benefit?" should draw out the would-be member of Parliament's
beliefs although 80 suspects Bennett takes a certain wicked glee in them,
none more so than "Approximately how many people have stopped going to
church in the past 15 years? One thousand? Twenty thousand? Or 1m?" and
"Are you wearing a
spiked garter under your suit?" (To learn
more of your local candidate's stance do take a look at
this page.)
Microgonesoft? - meanwhile in the country that has set such a bad
example of religious politics, the USA, threats by some whining churchman
have apparently caused the mighty Microsoft to drop support for a state
bill that would have barred discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation. The
New York Times (reg rqd) reports that
many feel the software company bowed to pressure from a local evangelical
church in Redmond, Washington. Dr. Hutcherson, pastor of the Antioch Bible
Church, had meetings with company representatives and claims he threatened
them with a national boycott of their products. This does sound rather
unlikely as it is damn near impossible to buy an ordinary pc without
Windows being installed as the operating system. What would all these holy
boycotters do, switch to Linux? Let's face it most people are technically
challenged even when faced with something as familiar as Windows, let
alone the somewhat arcane breeds of Linux. It is more than likely, in 80's
view, that rabid evangelists are even less technically competent than the
average - and as 80 has learned from bitter experience, praying has no
effect on a balky PC - or anything else for that matter. Swearing, on the
other hand, can be wonderfully bloody cathartic.
April 30th 2005
Plagiarize - let no one else's work evade your eyes*.
80 wishes to apologize for lifting material from another publication. When did
this happen? Right now - the National Secular Society's Newsline email
newsletter is a regular Friday shot in the arm and this week the letter writers
have excelled themselves. So, what better than to quote some of their thoughts
and incidentally plug the National Secular Society - the NSS have perfected the
art of making a point without descending into pomposity - the element of humor
is never far away. Anyway, on the with the bare-faced theft... Dave Purnell
wrote in with some pertinent observations regarding the new creation museum in
Kentucky, "Re. the creationist museum which showed a
saddled dinosaur (Newsline last week). This is perfectly sensible. Using
established scientific procedure, we start by examining the available evidence
(ie. the earth is 10,000 years old), create a testable hypothesis (that man and
dinosaurs therefore must have co-existed), then work out the consequences. One
of which is that men, as masters of the animal kingdom, would have rode astride
the dinosaurs for the purposes of travel, recreation, quarrying, etc. They would
also have used smaller herbivores to mow the lawn, and parrot-like dinosaurs as
telephones. This is exactly as described in the testimony of the Prophets Hanna
and Barbera (peace be upon them), available every day on the Boomerang Channel,
Sky 603." Here is Alan Rogers on the pope's funeral, "Later,
I accidentally saw a few seconds of the ‘spectacle’ on BBC news. Before I hit
the OFF switch I saw Bush, Rice, Blair (responsible for uncounted deaths in
Iraq), Prince Charles (adulterer and breaker of wedding vows) and Robert Mugabe
(vicious dictator extraordinaire)… all sitting in a line at the pope’s funeral.
‘You know a man by the company he keeps’ even in death it seems." If you
find yourself smiling and nodding in agreement with these writers 80 recommends
you check out
membership of the NSS - for the price of say, a
few lottery tickets, you can help make a difference and join a society "...on
the side of all humanity, the side of intelligence, rationality and decency".
Soiled Award - like a dog digging up a favorite, mouldering, odiferous
bone for one more chew, Ben Goldacre in his current Bad Science column returns
to the subject of the You Are What You Eat bullshitter,
Gillian McKeith. It seems that in a moment of
madness the
Soil Association has presented this
self-promoting, scientifically-illiterate, minor TV celebrity and pretend
nutritionist their 2005 Consumer Education award. Goldacre's take on all this is
a breath of fresh air - and one you can inhale
here. For an interesting look at McKeith's
medical knowledge see this
page "In
my view Dr Gillian McKeith is a charlatan. For all I know she may genuinely
believe what she says and has convinced herself she is giving the truth but
there is no scientific basis in anything she says." So says John Garrow,
professor emeritus in human nutrition at London University, retired head of
nutrition at St Bartholomew's Hospital and chairman of the internet medical
service Healthwatch.
May 2nd 2005
Holy Omerta - Mark
Lawson
writing in the Guardian on April 23rd revealed
a gift for prophecy when he wrote that "The worry for
Catholicism, though, is that, for the first time, a pope finds himself subject
to the minute journalistic research now standard for political candidates. What
if some embarrassing document or revelation about Ratzinger were to be found? " Right on cue the next day in the Guardian's sister paper the Observer
was the headline "Pope
'obstructed' sex abuse inquiry". It seems that Pope Benedict XVI,
then Joseph Ratzinger, in May 2001 sent a confidential letter to bishops
asserting the church's right to make its own investigations of child abuse
allegations and to keep those proceedings secret. It orders that the results of
investigations be referred to Ratzinger's office which, to quote the Observer, "...has
the option of referring them back to private tribunals in which the 'functions
of judge, promoter of justice, notary and legal representative can validly be
performed for these cases only by priests'." The letter also baldly
states "Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical
secret" the disclosure of which could be punished by excommunication.
This is less shepherd of the flock and more like capo of the mob -
omerta indeed. Ratzinger's attitude is made
clear in
another Observer piece by the same
correspondent, Jamie Doward, about
well-corroborated allegations of abuse made
against Marcial Maciel, founder of the Legion of Christ and confidant of Pope
John Paul II, who described him as "..efficacious guide to
youth". Ratzinger is also reported to have said of the accusations "One
can't put on trial such a close friend of the Pope as Marcial Maciel".
The arrogance displayed here is breathtaking. Sexual abuse of children is
apparently not serious to merit investigation if you are a close friend of the
Pope. There is no reason to expect that Ratzinger, a man in his late 70's, will
undergo a Damascene transformation into someone who actually cares about the
abuse of children rather than the Church's reputation just because he now has
the top job - it likely to be business as usual - and disgusting business at
that. It seems that this old man is quick
to see the mote in another's eye but is blind
to the bloody great beam in his own. At his inauguration mass Benedict/Ratzinger
said that his task was not to pursue his own
ideas, but to listen to and be "...guided by the will of
God." And who decides what is the will of God? Why, Ratzinger. Dressing a
hypocrite in a white stole does not make him any less a hypocrite. In the words
of his own scripture, he is nothing but a whited sepulchre "which
indeed appears beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones and of
all uncleanness". (Matt. 23:27 if you are curious)
Interstellar Bible-Bashers - which is more scary - aliens armed with
superweapons or aliens armed with religion? Quite frankly either sounds pretty
dire in 80's view, but movie director Steven Speilberg
thinks differently. Interstellar bible-bashers
hold no fears for him apparently "I can't believe anybody
would travel such vast distances bent on destruction. I believe anybody who
would travel such vast distances are curious explorers, not conquerors. Carrying
weapons a hundred-thousand light-years is quite a schlepp. I believe it's easier
to travel 100,000 light-years with their versions of the Bible." Would we
be considered ripe for conversion - perhaps the
forced conversion suffered by native Americans
at the hands of Catholic friars in the New World? Or would we be considered
animals or vermin for not being made in their God's image? Considering organized
religion's disgusting record on this planet 80 would be happier to see ET's
tentacle wrapped around a raygun rather than a bible. Let's hope neither is the
case. Perhaps Arthur C Clarke has it right, calling religion a "disease
of infancy", and in his novel 3001: The Final Odyssey it has become
taboo, a product of man's early ignorance that provoked hatred and bloodshed.
Given that so many scientific and technical advances have occurred despite, not
because of, organized religion perhaps ET will have outgrown all that nonsense.
Perhaps creatures that don't manage this are doomed to extinction. Poor old homo
not so sapiens. With rampant Islamic fundamentalism and the Bush
administration's efforts to turn the US into a theocracy maybe when ET does land
the planet will be vacant, just waiting for some new, and hopefully less
destructive and irrational tenants.
Mustache
Guy - the truth. Here is an
interesting item that goes some way towards
explaining George Bush's
nomination to the post of UN ambassador of a
man whose unsuitability for the job is
glaringly obvious, John Bolton. It seems that
Bolton was
up to his neck in the election scandal in
Florida in 2000. The article, from Daily Kos, charmingly, and accurately calls
Bolton "Scary Abusive Intelligence-Manipulating Mustache
Guy" and highlights his typically bombastic intervention in the vote
recount with the words "I'm with the Bush-Cheney team, and
I'm here to stop the count." Bolton was called in as attack dog by James
Baker, former Secretary of State, when it looked like the Florida count would be
crucial to Bush's chances. Bolton's job was to put an end to all that dangerous
democracy stuff. As one correspondent says on the Daily Kos page (scroll down to
the comments) "Bolton knows where the FL 2000 bodies are
buried. If you were Bush/Cheney would you abandon him?" It seems not,
hence his current nomination to serve as ambassador to an organization he has
repeatedly attacked and belittled. And there was 80 thinking Bush proposed him
for the job because of his neat trick of balancing that caterpillar on his upper
lip. (According to
this article from the Miami Herald Bolton is
just one of 50 people who "helped" in the Florida recount battle and who were
subsequently rewarded with political appointments)
Quotes
- from comments on the Daily Kos page mentioned above, "The
Book of Revelation is NOT a foreign policy manual." and this little gem,
"When the rapture comes can I have your stuff?"
May 4th 2005
21st
Century Delusion - in an article in the Guardian entitled "The
21st century atheist" Dylan Evans tells us that "Not
believing in God is no excuse for being virulently anti-religious or naively
pro-science." Evans is senior lecturer in intelligent autonomous systems
at the University of the West of England and on his website he proclaims that
his book, Introducing Evolutionary Psychology "...was
required reading for the main actors in The Matrix". The Matrix, you will
recall, was a movie, shot through with religious imagery, about a human race
held captive and used as the energy supply for a super computer that kept its
human batteries quiescent by fabricating a false reality. In the Guardian piece
Evans not only looks to be falling into a delusional trap of his own making, he
also takes an ineffectual swipe at what he calls the "...old
and tired" atheism of Richard Dawkins and Jonathan Miller. Evans claims
to distinguish his 21st century atheism from "old atheism" in three ways, "...it
values religion; treats science as simply a means to an end; and finds the
meaning of life in art." Leaving the first tenet for the moment let us
look at treating science as a means to an end. This is hardly new and would be
the position of old atheists as much as new. The idea that old-fashioned atheism
can be "..naively pro-science" is a nonsense.
Science, or more accurately the scientific method, is a human construct that
attempts to understand the universe, how it is put together, how it began and
how it may end. It is not perfect, as scientists themselves are fallible humans,
but unlike any other human activity it has the virtue of being self-correcting.
Science, and its application in technology, has to pass the Feynmann test, "For
a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for
Nature cannot be fooled." If something is shown by experiment not to
match Nature then it is rejected, simple as that. All scientific knowledge is
open to revision - which happens to be the very opposite of revealed religion.
Atheists are questioning types, otherwise they would not be atheists, and their
skepticism extends to science, as it does to any human endeavor that claims to
offer answers as to how the world truly is. As for Evans's third tenet that his
brand of atheism "...finds the meaning of life in art"
this is purely an opinion, as any individual's reaction to a work of art is a
subjective one. Asking whether anyone can find the meaning of life in art seems
to assume that life has a meaning in the first place. Physicist Steven Weinberg
sees things differently, "The more the universe seems
comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless." - which again is a
subjective view. If such meaning, or the lack thereof, could be proved
objectively there would be no room for religious faith, which is, after all, a
blind belief that your particular religion gives meaning to existence.
Which brings us to Evans's first tenet
of his new atheism, that it values religion. Here he becomes a victim of his own
imagination by falling for his ideal picture of an acceptable version of
religion, and yet all the while ignoring how it actually plays out in the real
world. He says, "When I say that I value religion, I don't
mean that I see any truth in the stories about gods, devils, souls and saviours.
But I do think there is one respect in which religion is more truthful than
science - in its depiction of the longing for transcendent meaning that lies in
man's heart.....My kind of atheism sees religions as presenting potent metaphors
and images to represent human aspirations for transcendence. It is only when
these metaphors are understood as such, and not mistaken for literal statements,
that the true value of religion is revealed." This is all very fine as a
personal point of view, but is not shared by the the growing numbers of
politically and socially active religious fundamentalists who believe the old
myths and legends in their holy book are literally true - and that this book
contains rules everyone else must obey on pain of punishment. The same people
would view new or old atheists as incapable of any morality or ethics, which are
solely the preserve of the believer and god-given. The sight of the USA under
Bush lurching toward an anti-science Christian theocracy, or Islamic suicide
bombers sowing death in crowded markets is enough to show Evans's view of
religion paints a pretty but grossly innaccurate and naive picture.
The rational world view and the
scientific method are under threat as never before and Evans's "21st century
atheism" is pathetically inadequate as a tool to combat this. Try discussing
religion's "...longing for transcendent meaning..."
with a Pope who would like to see medieval Christendom foisted on the European
Union, with women in the role of baby-making machines, or a creationist nitwit
who believes the planet is a mere few thousand years old and who flatly rejects
any scientific evidence to the contrary - and who wants such nonsense taught in
schools. Evans reveals how out of touch with reality he is when he says "Atheists
who attack religions for painting a false picture of the world are as
unsophisticated and immature as religious believers, who mistake the picture for
reality. The only mature attitude to religion is to see it for what it is - a
kind of art, which only a child could mistake for reality, and which only a
child would reject for being false." This sentence shows just how unaware
Evans is of the danger posed by religious fundamentalists in positions of power.
Try telling a religious fanatic who believes he has been specially chosen by God
to blow himself up on a school bus, or to fly an airliner into a skyscraper, or
to shoot a doctor who happens to provide abortions, that his religious
convictions are "..a kind of art". Evans's
so-called 21st century atheism is new in only one thing, its total uselessness
in the face of the resurgent, assertive and violent religiosity that threatens
everything humanity has learned since the Enlightenment - including the kind of
advances that allow Evans to be a senior lecturer in intelligent autonomous
systems rather than being persecuted or even killed for his lack of belief. 80
has tried to avoid the "ivory tower" cliche in this short piece but sadly that
is from where Evans views his world, a world that does not actually exist. It is
little wonder his book was required reading for the cast of The Matrix. Perhaps
it is time Evans took the
Red pill.
Here are some other reactions to Evans's piece
from Guardian letters, and
this is what Butterflies and Wheels has to say
about it.
Don't
Know How to Vote? - for anyone feeling challenged by the dazzling choices
available to UK voters, a look at
this page may help you concentrate. Or not.....
Politburo
Conclave - here is an interesting
article by Andrew Brown comparing the choice of
old hardliner Joseph Ratzinger to run the Catholic church with that of the
Politburo in the fading days of the Soviet Union when they selected old
hardliner Konstantin Chernenko as boss, fighting a rearguard action against
change. Hindsight tells us he was the last of the old brigade before Mikhail
Gorbachev the reformer. The fact that Gorbachev's reforms actually hastened the
end of that corrupt and repressive empire leads Brown to hope that the next
occupant of the Vatican will be a Pope Mikhail - with all that implies for the
Roman Catholic church. 80 is not convinced, but Brown's take on things is well
worth reading, as is much else on the
openDemocracy site. For example try
George W Bush: far from Mount Rushmore by
Godfrey Hodgson, Terri Schiavo, Iraq, social security, stem-cell research, the
supreme court – three months into President Bush’s second term, his right-wing
coalition is cracking...read on.
Unreal
Estate - here is what, at the moment, seems to be a purely American
phenomenon - Christian real estate agents. Not real estate agents that just
happen to be Christians but agents who trumpet their membership of the faith to
promote their business. This
piece in the San Francisco Chronicle introduces
us to the Christian Real Estate Network and their coyly named website
Hismove.com.
The main selling pitch seems to be that as these folk believe in a supernatural,
undead being, this somehow makes them more trustworthy to do business with. The
pledge of performance on the web page had 80 reaching for the sickbag, "As
committed believers, and as Real Estate Professionals, we Agree to provide a
level of service to our clients which will glorify our Lord and Savior, Jesus
Christ." How does buying and selling property at a profit glorify their
God? It comes down to the usual Christian drivel that because they think a
bogeyman is looking over their shoulder all the time ready to damn them for
eternity if they screw up they are somehow more ethical. What happened to
ordinary, non-supernaturally enforced integrity and fairness? If the only reason
someone is square with you is because of their fear of divine retribution, is
that not deeply sad? Why not treat others fairly and considerately because you,
yourself, not some nebulous savior, feel that is the right thing to do. This
whole business is one more example of Christians arrogantly assuming that their
particular delusions somehow make them more moral than those who can make up
their own minds as to how to treat others. Then, to cap it all, these smug
bastards use their supposedly high morals as a marketing tool. Where the hell is
that sickbag?
May 5th 2005
Cross
Dilemma? - it cannot have escaped the notice of those eligible to vote in
UK elections that today is polling day. If you are a humanist/atheist and are
still undecided you are leaving things a bit late, but before rushing off to the
polling booth take 5 minutes to read this article in New Humanist by Nick Cohen,
Where will you put your cross? which looks at
what the major parties are offering unbelievers. They are all keen (excepting
the Greens) to court the religious vote, but what are they promising those
unencumbered by a god or gods? If after reading Cohen you are still a waiverer
perhaps you should cast your ballot in favor of the
Monster Raving Loony Party which, among other candidates is fielding The Flying Brick, Shadow
Minister for The Abolition of Gravity, Dancing Ken, Shadow Minister of
Happiness and Jedediah Caleb Bartimaeus Headbanger, Shadow Minister of Silly
Sausages.
Burka
Sprint - sometimes, right in the middle of a serious news item a
description or turn of phrase can trigger amusement wholly inappropriate to the
subject. This happened today when reading a New York Times
piece (reg rqd) about the arrest of a man
identified as an al Qaeda bigwig, Abu Faraj al-Libbi. (In passing, 80 can't help
thinking the US administration still regards al Qaeda as a hierarchical
organization like Ian Fleming's SPECTRE, rather than a loose network that
enables disparate and otherwise independent groups of terrorists - but that's
another story) The details of his capture included this description "Two
Pakistani intelligence officials said a tip early Monday led to a suspected
hideout in Mardan. When intelligence officials arrived, he fled on a motorbike.
They pursued him, with two of them disguised as burka-clad women, until Mr.
Libbi holed up in a house." 80 cannot help but wonder, just how fast can
you move wearing a burka? Two guys wearing tents running after a speeding
motorbike must have been quite a sight.....more Inspector Clousseau than James
Bond. (Update - despite all the antics it now seems they have no bigwig after
all, but a very
small fish.)
Backwards Preacher Man - a short while ago 80
mentioned the story of Microsoft and the minister, one Dr. Ken Hutcherson of the
Antioch Bible Church in Redmond (see
Microgonesoft?). Hutcherson claimed he, or more
accurately his threats, caused Microsoft to withdraw support for a state bill
that aims to bar discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, a claim 80,
at the time, doubted. Apparently Hutcherson feels his faith justifies
homophobia, but his actions have attracted scrutiny from many unsympathetic to
his prejudices. The Cleveland Plain Dealer does not beat about the bush with an
article called "'Lovable'
minister preaches hatred" by Connie Schultz. What she is bothered
about is not his religiously-inspired prejudice, let's face it, sadly
gay-bashing preachers are a dime a dozen, no, she is concerned about the veneer
of good humor that shrouds Hutcherson's real motives. As she says, "What
I find most troubling about Hutcherson is the charm he brings with every blow to
civil liberties. His wit and self-deprecatory humor make for real entertainment,
and laughter is a great way to disguise the hate he's peddling." He also
uses the fact that he is an African-American (whatever happened to black? Many
African-Africans find the term African-American downright silly) to back up his
assertion that he understands what it is like to be on the receiving end of
prejudice. To 80 this makes it all the more baffling that he in his turn is
prejudiced against homosexuality - is he worried that it might be made
compulsory? He also is sure that Jesus, who never mentions gays in the Gospels,
would "...would have expelled homosexuals." It is
an indication of the size of his ego that Hutcherson has the confidence to put
words in his deity's mouth. 80 wonders what else Jesus failed to mention that
Hutcherson would like to invent. But just how accurate is this bigmouthed
preacher's claim that he scared Microsoft with a software boycott into acceding
to his demands? This piece from
Stranger.com informs us that "Minister and
Microsoft Executive Offer Wildly Different Versions of Meeting." Now
there's a hard call to make, who's lying, the Beast of Redmond or a religious
bigot? Sandeep Kaushik's piece tells us that Microsoft, no doubt somewhat
embarrassed and under fire from gay activists, is disputing the minister's
claims of influence, although not convincingly. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer
denies that Hutcherson influenced the decision to drop support for the
legislation and that the decision had already been made. As Kaushik shows, the
whole thing has turned into a "yes you did, no I didn't" schoolyard-style spat.
The upshot is that no one comes out with any credit whatsoever. Microsoft should
not have withdrawn support, whether they were influenced by the preacher or not,
they have no justification for their volte-face. Hutcherson has no place trying
to push his bigoted views onto others no matter how he sugar-coats his
prejudices - he is yet another unpleasant symptom of America's slide into a
hypocritical theocracy. Land of the free? Not if you are gay it seems.
May 7th 2005
Vanquished Virgin - the prize for daft headline of the week must go
to a BBC news page with "'Vision
of the Virgin' vandalised". (To be fair they do get 8 out of
ten for alliteration) This vision, like all the other Virgin apparitions,
was strictly in the eye of the beholder, as only the eye of
faith/gullibility could discern a human figure in what was just a stain on
a concrete wall in a Chicago underpass. This leads to the question, can
one vandalize a salt stain? The answer has to be no. One Victor Gonzalez
has been accused of daubing the wall with the words "big lie" in brown
paint which may well be vandalism, but vandalism of a concrete wall and
not some imagined image. This "image" of the Virgin is but one of a
succession of such. The old girl has turned up as
fencepost in Australia (this one was "vandalized"
too), and on windows
and
toast in the
US. As 80 has observed before, this minor Christian deity has nothing on
the showy tribal god of Old Testament times - at least he could manage a
burning bush and a pillar of fire. Personally 80 thinks thinks they are
all true manifestions of the blessed Saints
Rorschach and
Pareidolia.
George Bush will be talking a lot about democracy during his
forthcoming trip to Russia, Latvia and Georgia but he couldn't endure the
real thing. The British electoral process, flawed though it undoubtedly
is, comes far closer to that ideal than Dubya could dare to imagine.This
is summed up nicely by a quote from Julian Borger
writing in the Guardian on how the
election was seen in Washington, DC. "Among so many
mixed opinions of the big picture, there were a few things Washington's
political class could agree on. Several pundits felt there was something
raw and viscerally democratic about the way, the father of a dead soldier
could directly confront the prime minister at Sedgefield, and say his
piece while the nation studied Mr Blair's face. It could never happen to
the president." Damn' right it couldn't.
Talking With Dawkins - if you read only one thing this week (apart
from this paragraph obviously) do take a minute or two to read the
interview with Richard Dawkins by Gordy Slack at
Salon.com. You will need to go through a
couple of pages of ads to reach it but it is well worth that minimal
inconvenience. 80 was tempted to lift some quotes to give a flavor of the
discourse, but the trouble with Dawkins is that almost every sentence
qualifies - 80 would have ended merely reprinting the entire interview and
no doubt attracting the attention of copyright lawyers. Given this, one
representative quote will have to act as an enticement, should one be
needed. In answer to the question "How would we be
better off without religion?" Dawkins said "We'd
all be freed to concentrate on the only life we are ever going to have.
We'd be free to exult in the privilege -- the remarkable good fortune --
that each one of us enjoys through having been being born. An
astronomically overwhelming majority of the people who could be born never
will be. You are one of the tiny minority whose number came up. Be
thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain and presumptuous
desire for a second one. The world would be a better place if we all had
this positive attitude to life. It would also be a better place if
morality was all about doing good to others and refraining from hurting
them, rather than religion's morbid obsession with private sin and the
evils of sexual enjoyment." There's plenty more where that came
from - do read the interview. (Here is another interview from 1995
courtesy of Skeptic.com called
Darwin's Dangerous Disciple)
May 9th 2005
Bananas
in Kansas - a couple of things needs to be straightened out here -
Intelligent Design (ID) is merely the deceitful wing of the creationist
movement. The IDer's evasions, when asked exactly who or what their Designer is,
are as pathetic as they are unconvincing. Documentary evidence has been around
for a good while (see
Wedge Cat) that they believe the Designer to be
the Judaeo-Christian god and they are dissembling when they say anything else.
Given that ID is little more than a front, this reduces the opposition to
evolution to one group, the creationists, whether they try to give their
nonsense a scientific gloss or not. When I say one group this is not to imply
that all creationists agree with each other, but the majority of them in America
believe in a young Earth, Noah's flood and all the other biblical myths. What
many folk don't realize is that in trying to twist and misinterpret reality to
fit their beliefs they not only repudiate evolution but also biology, geology,
physics and astronomy. And these are the people putting evolution "on trial" in
Kansas right now. In this article in the
Washington Post (reg rqd) the first paragraph
encapsulates what is really happening in the dispute about the teaching of
evolution in the science class, " Witnesses trying to
persuade Kansas officials to encourage more criticism of evolution in public
school classrooms are making statements some scientists say betrayed creationist
views." More damning is the observation that witnesses in the hearing had
not even read the very science standards that they are trying to replace - and
neither had "two of three presiding board members".
So these people are trying to do away with standards that they haven't even
bothered to familiarize themselves with. Now why is this so? Are they just lazy
or is the document too difficult for them or do they not need to read it having
made up their minds already on religious grounds? Any one of the three, or a
combination is likely. Typical of the witnesses is a biology instructor at
Kennesaw State University in Georgia, Nancy Bryson who told the Post that life
originating from molecules is "..utterly impossible".
She then goes on to say "In my personal opinion, I believe
there is an intelligent designer." Where is the evidence presented by
this woman? All we have is an argument from incredulity backed up by her
personal opinion. On this basis how does she qualify as a witness for anything
but her own beliefs? One of the two board members who could not be bothered to
take the time to read the very proposal she opposes, Kathy Martin, says it all,
"I'm not a word-for-word reader in this kind of technical
information." Not a word-for-word reader? And this is one of the people
who is supposedly competent to decide what children are taught in a science
class? Perhaps someone should provide Martin a kindergarten version of the
proposal that she can try and get her head around. One also has to wonder on
what basis scientific witnesses were selected, such as John Sanford, an
associate professor of horticultural sciences at Cornell University who when
asked to explain the appearance of humans on the planet answered "My
explanation, humbly offered, is that we were specially created." What
arrogance - specially created, and since when did humble offerings become
scientific evidence?. It would be interesting to hear his explanation as to why
human beings share 50% of their genes with the banana if we are not, however
distantly, related. Perhaps his god was working with a limited set of
components - which makes him a rather limited little deity - still, even then,
50% banana doesn't sound much like "..we were specially
created". 80 pities the children who will grow up handicapped by the
teaching of unscientific nonsense if this bunch have their way. It is enough to
drive you half bananas.
The Right
Move - further to the piece Backwards Preacher Man it seems that Microsoft has been stung by the
adverse criticism and publicity about its retreat in the face of threats from
homophobic bigot Dr. Ken Hutcherson of the Antioch Bible Church. The
New York Times (reg rqd) tells us that Steve
Ballmer, chief exec, sent an email to 35,000 employees in the United States
stating, "After looking at the question from all sides,
I've concluded that diversity in the workplace is such an important issue for
our business that it should be included in our legislative agenda."
Hutcherson, whose claims that it was his threats that caused Microsoft to
remove support from a bill against discrimination on sexual orientation grounds
have not been substantiated, has yet to comment. As 80 pointed out in an earlier
piece (Microgonesoft)
Hutcherson's threats of boycotting the company's products never did sound very
intimidating. Perhaps Microsoft realized how silly and unworkable a Windows
boycott would be - the only wonder is what took them so long. Sadly, in common
with many of his fellow religionists this apparent setback to the deeply
unpleasant Hutcherson is unlikely to teach him that other people's sexuality is
none of his damn' business.
May 11th 2005
Ultra
Drivel - not to be outdone by his mom (see
Vanquished Virgin) it seems that Jesus has
popped up in an ultrasound scan at Toledo Hospital in Ohio. The parents,
according to this idiotic
ABC news report "...say
they received a sign she is special in an ultrasound photo taken about a month
ago. After taking a closer look at the ultrasound they say there's an image of
Jesus Christ in it. It's an image mom and dad say they can see in two of the
ultrasound images taken that day." 80 doesn't wish to say anything to
detract from their joy at the birth of a healthy child but it is a sad thought
that little Aaliyah's parents will no doubt bring up the child to believe in
this drivel. Here is one of the
miraculous scans - can you see Jesus' beaming
face? No, I thought not.
Conduct
Unbecoming.. - "What message are we sending to the
world community?....We have sought to appoint an ambassador to the United
Nations who himself has been accused of being arrogant, of not listening to his
friends, of acting unilaterally, and of bullying those who do not have ability
to properly defend themselves. Those are the very characteristics that we are
trying to dispel." Senator George V. Voinovich of Ohio, commenting on the
nomination of the wholly unsuitable John R. Bolton (see
Mustache Guy). Sadly, the same comments could
also describe how most of the rest of the world, and many in the US, see George
W Bush's America.
Finally,
The Answer - to one of life's big questions, if not the biggest, and only
just a click
away.
"Special", Redefined - Prime Ministers of Britain, past and present, have
made much of a so-called "special relationship" with the US. Often this seems to
be little more than, as in the 1970s and 80s, the island becoming the US's
largest aircraft carrier. A recent instance is Tony Blair's eagerness to join
with George Bush's neo-con administration in the ill-planned invasion and
occupation of Iraq, which, for all spin applied to it, still looks like a bloody
quagmire. A less well-known instance of the Blair government's eagerness to
please in the aftermath of the 9/11 atrocity is the change to the extradition
procedure (Extradition
Act 2003) to the US. This removed the requirement for American
prosecutors to present a prima facie ("at first sight") case before a British
extradition hearing. Simply put, they need present no evidence. This change, by
removing such a check, has greatly speeded up the procedure - but to whose
benefit? In February this year, according to this
Guardian piece by Simon Bowers, Blair defended
the Act as justified and right in a "post September 11"
context. So, how many requests have been made under the act? 43, "...of
which 22 relate to white-collar crime charges. Only three relate to terrorism
suspects." Still, with this special relationship it must make it easier
for the Brits to get hold of any miscreants hiding out in the US, right? Wrong -
the Bush government has yet to sign a reciprocal agreement. Which means this is
a one-way street - a case of you scratch my back and you can scratch your own
too. Now you know what is so special about the so-called special relationship -
nothing. 80 will be watching the challenge being mounted to this ridiculous
state of affairs by the lawyers of the latest white collar suspect that Uncle
Sam wants handed over. (see Joshua Rozenberg in the Telegraph for
details.) This is yet another instance of a
nasty phenomenon that obtains on both sides of the Atlantic - the loss of civil
liberties in the name of the "war against terror" that in fact has nothing to do
with terrorism - unless you happen to be a Prime Minister trying to justify this
nonsense.
May 17th 2005
Galloway
Bites - 80 has never been much of a fan of British MP George Galloway but you
have to admire the slapping he gave the US Senate Oil for Food investigator,
Senator Norman Coleman. Obviously no one had checked out what a handful Galloway
can be, which is why he was handed such a platform to criticize the invasion of
Iraq and its continuing bloody consequences. The whole confrontation was a
circus, but it certainly wasn't stroppy George who ended up looking like a
clown. This account from
The Nation by John Nichols is hardly unbiased
reporting but is certainly entertaining enough in its own way. Perhaps Mr
Galloway should visit the US more often. (For more on the Oil for Food scam this
piece from
Capitol Hill Blue and this in the
Guardian make for interesting reading. Two
words that spring to mind are, cui bono?)
What's In
a Name? - in Contra Costa county, Northern California, one of the area's
beautiful landmarks, Mount Diablo, is under attack. Not the landmark itself, you
understand, but its name. This is a favorite spot of 80's for a walk, a picnic
and just to take in the scenery, but it seems the name given it by the original
Spanish settlers is not good enough for one particular gentleman, Art Mijares.
He wants it changed and has applied to the U.S. Board of Geographic Names to do
so, according to
this SF Gate.com piece. The name he suggests is
Mount Kawukum, which he claims is indigenous and means "laughing
mountain, everywhere seen." If the reason for the change was driven by
the same kind of considerations as the Australian Ayers Rock, named after its
European "discoverer" and now called by its original (and aboriginal) name,
Uluru, one could have some sympathy with Mijares but this is not the case. He
wants it changed because he thinks it is named after an imaginary bogeyman,
otherwise known as Mr Scratch, Old Nick or the Devil. So what if it is? This is
yet another tiresome example of a whiny Christian wanting to change or censor
something because of his superstitious fear. If it's not Hallowe'en or Harry
Potter it's Mount Diablo. A recent local example quoted in the SFGate article is
the change of name from Diablo Street to Antioch Street in nearby Vallejo, after
the Antioch Church of God had complained. Now this church probably thinks
Antioch is a nice Christian name and that city, now in Southern Turkey, was
indeed an early center of Christian activity. What they probably don't know is
that it was originally founded by the pagan Seleucid dynasty, descendants of one
of Alexander the Great's generals, Seleucus. A later Seleucid king, Antiochus
Epiphanes, was notorious for occupying Jerusalem and
desecrating the temple there, a temple in
which, rebuilt by Herod the Great, the bible says Jesus and his disciples
worshipped. (There is also the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, but that's
another story.) Happily the SFGate piece takes
Mijares' concerns lightly - it seems even his suggested name, Kawukum, does not
exist in the Californian Indian languages. It appears that Mijares does not know
what the devil he is talking about. It is a beautiful mountain by any name and
if Mount Diablo has been good enough since the early 19th century there is no
point in changing it now to pander to the superstitions of the ignorant. For
explanations of many names in Mount Diablo State Park, including the mountain,
take a look
here. For those of you who don't want this
pointless name change to happen go to
SaveMountDiablo.org and join the campaign to
stop this nonsense in its tracks. Oh, by the way, if you are up there anytime
enjoying Mount D's natural beauty and you catch a glimpse of a guy with horns
and a tail - that'll be 80 out for a stroll. (By a strange coincidence Contra
Costa features in the current View - see
here)
May 19th 2005
Shredded
Parsley - 80 has mentioned the
Humanist
Network News on several occasions. It is a free weekly compendium of
news items and comment from a (surprise, surprise) humanist perspective. Based
in the US it regularly features news from all around the world, with input from
particularly Canada and the UK. It is one of the public faces of an educational
non-profit organization, The
Institute for Humanist Studies (IHS), which is
a think tank whose mission is to promote greater public awareness,
understanding, and support for humanism. The Institute specializes in pioneering
new technology and methods for the advancement of humanism. You can sign up to
receive a copy on their
website or simply click the link in the left
margin of this page. One regular feature is a book review section, and for the
last five weeks Kenneth W Krause has been looking at Pastor Rod Parsley's
Silent No More: Bringing Clarity to America... While
Freedom Still Rings. Over this time Krause has skilfully dissected
and examined the worldview of Parsley, as enshrined in his book, and finds it
seriously wanting. Parsley, founder of the
Center for
Moral Clarity, is one of a growing number of religionists in the US
and elsewhere who feel constricted by the separation of Church and State and
would like to see their religious beliefs given the force of law. Right from the
start Krause shows us the mind behind the book, "[T]his
book isn't designed to move you to think great thoughts," confesses Rod
Parsley.......in the introduction to his new book, Silent No More. One could at
least credit the pastor with candor and consistency, I suppose, had he not
recorded the sentence, "I don't apologize for writing a book that requires
thought," only one short paragraph earlier. Confused? So was I, until I
grudgingly accepted that both con and contradiction are core elements of
Parsley's style." To read this whole fascinating and highly recommended
review click
here. A look at Parsley's book on
Amazon.com is also informative, especially
about the company it keeps. This is represented by the list of other books
purchased by buyers of Silent No More, which include "The
Maker's Diet: The 40 Day Health Experience That Will Change Your Life Forever"
and "The American Prophecies: Ancient Scriptures Reveal
Our Nation's Future". Several readers' reviews are full of gushing praise
for the book. Here's one that seems to encapsulate Parsley's target audience "Courageous
and Truthful ....The book just confrms what others before him have been saying
and proclaiming: Islam is a threat to human civilization....Christianity is
being viciously attacked by liberal politicians in Washington and other
anti-Christian groups, now a humble preacher decided to be "silent not
(sic) more."" 80 wonders which liberal politicians
these might be - certainly not the ones in the majority right now. As a
counterbalance to this there is a review that is a model of brevity and which 80
feels hits this particular nail on the head, "Utter Bovine
Scat - Another example of a fundy who thinks that unless he has the power to
force all of us to conform to his thinking that he is being discriminated
against. Full of lies and half truths." This last quote is Krause's
summation from his review, "The pastor quite correctly
observed that “people are grasping for spirituality at any price.” But I hope
“any price” will not include the purchase of this book, because I would feel
especially sorry for any person who bought it expecting to learn something."
Empathy Lesson - here is a suggestion for Pastor
Parsley (see above) and others like him that yearn for a theocracy. Try and use
your limited intellect to imagine how ghastly and dreadful you would find life
under the Taleban or the mullahs of Iran. Got that picture in your head? Good,
now try and understand that is exactly how 80 and many, many others feel about
your projected Christian state.
May 20th 2005
Stephen
in Wonderland - it can be very sad to watch an individual's retreat from
reality but in the case of Stephen Green, of loony pressure group Christian
Voice, it can afford a great deal of amusement. In Britain it is traditional
that an incoming government's proposed program of legislation is announced in
the Queen's Speech, whereby the monarch is obliged to parrot whatever has been
written for her by the politicians. The real thing is pantomime enough, but it
is obviously far too close to the real world for Green, who has produced his own
weirdo Christian fundamentalist version for the monarch to mouth - a
Green's Speech if you will. Upon reading this document the first
observation is that the spelling and grammar are pretty good, which leads to the
conclusion that Green must have had a grown-up to help him. (Although as the
speech is downloadable in Word format perhaps it was the blessed
St. Clippy who did the work.) Secondly, as has
been noted elsewhere, he indulges in the usual cherrypicking of biblical laws, a
common practice with religious nuts. There is little need to discuss his ravings
point by point as we have heard it all before, ad nauseam. The main impression
80 gets from this document is that Green is retreating into a never-never land.
He is clearly losing his struggle with reality and this imaginary Queen's speech
is only more evidence of that. His fantasy talebanisation of Britain would be
repugnant to everyone, bar a few of his fellow loonies. He seems to have slipped
up though, for search as 80 may, there is no clause proclaiming Green as
Archbishop-General of Great Britain. No doubt he will rectify this omission in
the near future. Purely in the spirit of humanist charity 80 would like to
extend to Green the same advice offered to the equally offensive Pastor Parsley
- see Empathy Lesson below.
Star Wars v
Adolf Hitler - if you were concerned about the level
of debate in the US Senate over the filibuster row, a look at
this page (reg rqd) from the New York Times
will not set your mind at rest one tiny bit. As the preparation continues for
the forthcoming battle over George Bush's judicial nominees, new standards were
set when Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey, brought out a
picture of Chancellor Palpatine, a character in the new "Star Wars" movie, and
noted that he was a Senate leader who broke rules to amass power."As
millions of Americans go to see this film in the weeks ahead, I sincerely hope
that it doesn't mirror actions being contemplated in the Senate of the United
States." Mr. Lautenberg said. There was only one thing left for Senator
Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania to do, and that was to play the Nazi card. In
blaming the Democrats for breaking with Senate tradition by their tactics he
said, "It's the equivalent of Adolf Hitler in 1942 saying:
'I'm in Paris. How dare you invade me. How dare you bomb my city? It's mine.'
" Later, regretting his remark Santorum said "....it was a
mistake and I meant no offense." Somehow 80 doesn't think exchanges like
these add anything to the debate and succeed in making the whole process sound
like brats squabbling in a school yard.
May 21st 2005
CLOOB! - after reading the astrologers'
mealy-mouthed spinning of their less than
spot on predictions for the UK general election, which shows them no
better informed than anyone else and a damn' sight sillier, 80 was
reminded of a word recently coined by
Tony Youens - cloob. Tony defines it as "..actually
shorthand for “complete load of old bollocks” and although it can be
applied to anything supernatural it is by no means limited to that field.
For example homeopathy is also a cloob." Although abuse is
considered a fairly low tactic in a debate the word cloob is more than
justified when describing the same tired old nonsensical claims that, even
though they have no supporting evidence whatsoever, are endlessly recycled
by the gullible, the stupid and the just pla