Barack Obama Bombs Pakistan

“The CIA’s bombing campaign against al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan continued with two more attacks today, an indication, senior officials say, that President Barack Obama has approved the U.S. strategy that has killed at least eight of al Qaeda’s top 20 leaders since July 2008.

The two attacks today in Pakistan’s were the first since President Obama took office on Tuesday….”

More at the ABC blotter

Comment:

Hooray for change! 

Note that Bush actually objected to bombing Pakistan without asking Musharraf’s permission, something Obama criticized. As this Huffington Post piece from last year points out, in this respect, Obama’s action today is worse than Bush’s and more in line with the CIA’s stated preference. (This is not an endorsement of Bush –  at least, Obama got the country right).

Terror Wars: Mumbai Attacks Not About Kashmir

KABUL: Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee said on Thursday international community should not link 26/11 attacks on Mumbai to the Kashmir dispute.

Addressing a joint press conference with his Afghan counterpart Rangeen Dadfar Spanta, Mukherjee said the international community has to take Mumbai attacks as a part of global terrorism,

Apparently referring to the recent statement made by the British Foreign Secretary David Miliband on Kashmir suggesting terror attacks in south Asia would stop with the resolution of the Kashmir dispute, Mukherjee said: These attacks (on Mumbai) are not related to Jammu and Kashmir and are a part of global terrorism.”

More at The Jang News, Pakistan.

Comment:

What’s with Miliband? Whence this common-sense approach so conspicuously absent from that little unpleasantness in Mesopotamia this past – what is it? – half a decade?

Oh, I see. The Brits don’t want the Wogs* to step out of their carefully allotted place in the terror theater.  Can’t have Gunga-Din getting a piece of the global terror racket. No, let the regional empires stick to the regional market. And let the Anglo-American Empire collect on the global terror trade – where you get the best prices and the highest return on your money.

*Westernized Oriental Gentlemen

Are The Palestinians Jesus Christ?

“Precisely the language of the Catechism: “Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow.” Catechism 2264…..”

“I’d first like to explain why I identify the Palestinian people of Gaza with Jesus Christ. Fundamental to the gospel is God’s love and predilection for the weak and abused of human history. This is not based on their moral purity or piety, but because of who God is. In the Beatitudes, the word for “poor” is ptochoi, meaning the “stooped”, the “dismayed”. Note that it says nothing about whether they are Christian, righteous, or members of approved social groups, but only that they are the needy, the helpless. Likewise, the word “hungering”, peinontes in Greek, means to suffer deprivation resulting from evil acts of violence perpetrated over an extended period. The use of the verb klaiein, “weep”, in the Beatitudes, means profound suffering as a result of permanent marginalization. So it is that those without social status, the inconsequential, those whose lives are of no value to society, who will inherit the Kingdom.

What people can be more justly spoken of in these terms than the Palestinians living in Gaza? For the past two years, Gaza has been under a blockade that includes food, medicine, and gasoline. Their only means of survival were the tunnels to Egypt that have now been blasted. Their major sources of electricity were destroyed nearly a year ago, meaning no incubators for premature babies or pumps for water and sewage. And that was just to soften them up for what they’re getting now.”

From Non-violent Jesus

Comment:

Enough with the “fair and balanced” humbuggery. There is no fair and balanced when a burglar breaks into your house at night, grabs your family and bludgeons them to death in front of you for no reason except his greed and malice. If you are a human being of any kind, man, woman or child,  you’re going to fight back.

Man, woman or child –  those who feel they should avenge their family’s deaths are not evil.

They are noble, first, in their innocent suffering. And then in their innocent fight in the name of  justice and retribution.

Madoff With It: Did Bernie Siphon Off Money Through Primex?

FINRA has found no evidence of trades by Bernie Madoff on behalf of his private investment fund through Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, a commercial brokerage founded in 1960.

This appears to be a brick in the wall of ‘rogue trader’ status. He could do it himself because he made no trades at all.

However this was not Bernie’s only commercial operation in the securities business, in addition to his now nefarious private fund.

Primex was registered as Primex Holdings, L.L.C. in NYS in October of 1998. Primex is a joint venture involving a digital trading auction which operates out of Bernie’s 18th floor office at 885 Third Ave.

Madoff’s business partners in the Primex Exchange were Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and Merrill Lynch.

Did Bernie give any business to this joint venture? Did any of the above brokers have any investments or losses with the Madoff Fund? If not why not? It was one of the most successful funds, on paper, on the Street?

More questions than answers. Let’s hope this one does not disappear down a black hole like the enormous put option positions placed on the airline stocks just prior to 9/11.

See Jesse’s Cafe Americain

Comment:

Haha, Jesse. Did I hear 9/11 put options?  In DC-think that’s, “I am a certifiable loon, a gun-clinging survivalist-creationist with neo-Nazi leanings. Please ignore my ravings and leave me to dribble here in my corner.”

New Blinds On The Old Broken Window

The colorful face of empire:

“With a black first family in the White House and a diverse group of appointees and Cabinet nominees, the all-white dinner party feels all wrong. Certain hosts are suddenly grappling with a new reality: They need some black friends. Overnight, black politicians, lawyers and journalists are hot properties, receiving engraved invitations from people they never got invitations from before. (emphasis mine)

“This article, trumpeting the latest blend of powerbrokers, is about as far from the mark of what the real problem is as you can get without entering a vegetative state.  As if we’re supposed to be all Woo Hoo! because the percentage of beltway players that could use a tan has gone down.  Please…

See, the issue here isn’t what the people with influence look like.  Their overwhelming whiteness has been historical coincidence due to previous factors, which is being dealt with already.  No, the issue is this: as long as the same ideas and the same worldview are in charge, nothing will change, no matter how loudly the mainstream press cheers.  If accepting the status quo is the price of admission then functionally we’ve not moved, and are merely sticking new blinds on a broken window….”

Read the rest of the post by libertarian blogger, Psychopolitik

Comment:

 Now, tell me why you never hear this slant from most of the African American community’s representatives in the media? Instead, you get the voices of the “welfare establishment” – those who think the community must always look to Washington to address its problems. Less frequently, you hear the voices of conservatives, but they also think you need to have someone with a gun and a slogan as some kind of prop for their religious views.

You hear someone with libertarian or antistate views rarely.

 But then, of course,  why would you, with a media mostly beholden to the gun-makers correction: weapons industry and the sloganeers?

Update:Rereading this, I find it sounds as if I am opposed to gun ownership. I am not. I meant the weapons industry, as in weapons of war.

I’m all for responsible gun ownership and nurse unending dreams of  that handy revolver I’ll have some day, hidden snugly in a hip pocket….

 

 

Google Disappearing Act

“My research indicates that this case of the disappearing blog is not unique. Another Perth-based blogger, Simone, suffered the same fate with her popular blog EnjoyPerth – but in her case the Google ex-communication was total. That is, all trace of her blog simply disappeared from Google’s listings overnight – even external links!

It turned out that her blog had been infiltrated by a hacker, who had planted a ‘hidden’ SPAM harvester at the bottom of her home page. Google had apparently detected the multiple inbound SPAM links reaped by the harvester and – as is fair enough – implemented their policy of penalising sites that illegitimately optimise themselves for search engines using dummy inbound links.

Simone, however, was innocent of utlising an illegitimate SEO strategy and Google didn’t bother contacting her to explain their drastic retaliatory action until Google’s Matt Cutts was made aware of the situation through the TechCrunch site’s expose of her dilemma. See When Google Strikes: The Story Of EnjoyPerth.net

All’s well that ends well; Simone’s blog was re-instated and before long was back in the listings gathering traffic. Without the assistance of the influential TechCrunch, though, and some tech-savvy friends, EnjoyPerth might have been obliterated and many months of effort on Simone’s part sabotaged by the dirty work of a hacker. And it seems to me that Google’s customer relations could do with some refinement.

Abrupt, unexplained de-indexing is a pretty savage measure, and in the case of some sites, could potentially destroy businesses and incomes and lead to real hardship. When people are innocent of transgressing Google’s rules – as Simone was – imposing a blog death sentence without trial or even notification that a capital offence has been committed seems nothing short of fascistic.

In fact, I do not believe that Google is the bully on the search engine block. Rather, it has grown too large for its own good. I’m guessing that it lacks the resources to action sound customer relations every time a serious SEO transgression comes on to their radar screens.

In effect, however, as Simone’s case demonstrates, Google’s punitive actions can be heavy-handed, unfair and damaging, not to mention personally traumatic to the victim. A company that was once seen as a maverick – a refreshing antidote to a stuffy, inhumane corporate system – is now in danger, by virtue of its staggering growth and size alone, of falling victim to its own success and being perceived as just another monster in an Establishment full of them.

To get back to my own case, I have received some good advice from the AussieBloggers Forum and my friend Christine, of Semfire Search Engine Marketing, which I am about to implement. For the benefit of interested onlookers and maybe other bloggers who wake up one morning to find their baby gone, I will detail my remedial attempts and provide updates as they happen.

Firstly, I should communicate Christine’s view that my disappearing blog listing may not be a result of any wilful action on Google’s part. She says my recent post,Boomtown Lament, was indexed by Google (cached on 21 January) and that she suspects the current crisis is just a glitch.

She has examined the coding on my home page and can find no trace of SPAM harvesters. And as previously mentioned, there are still external links and individual post links to my blog appearing in Google’s listings. So my situation appears to be different from Simone’s.

But what to do? This is what I have been advised:

1. Register for Google’s Webmaster Tools. I have done so, “verified” my blog (this is explained by Google after your WT registration is accepted) and sent a “Reconsideration Request” to Google, explaining the current situation and pleading innocent to any flouting of their rules – at least that I am aware of. I will post the gist of any response I receive from them.

2. Upgrade to the latest version of WordPress. This is a task I have been avoiding for months. The time has come – I can put it off no longer (sucking in deep breath as I write).

3. Install the WordPress “All-in-one-SEO-pack” plugin. In advising me thus, Christine stated: I’m putting my bet on the fact that your page titles are very similar and you don’t have a description metatag for your pages so Google sees your posts as possible duplicate content.

4. I’m also wondering whether self-referentiality in some of my recent blog titles (ie: referring to The Boomtown Rap by name in the titles) may have been interpreted by Google as some form of duplication intended to boost my listing…which it certainly was not. I was already being listed at number 1 – I had no reason to resort to such tactics. Besides, I work hard on my titles and would not compromise dramatic effect for some bloody SEO consideration. My self-referentiality was appropriate, since the posts concerned were about the blog itself….”

From the Boomtown Rapper

Comment:

Thanks to one of my readers, I got the search engine problem fixed. I’d checked off the box that keeps the blog out of search engine reach….must have done that in my sleep and forgotten about it. Duh! But, more nefariously, some links to one of my rather provocative posts were broken, after only a day.  Very mysteriously. I repaired them, using this handy free tool – Xenu Link Sleuth (it’s recommended by reputable sites, like Site Point Tribute and Search Engine Journal, but as always, download at your own peril).

Brainy Bingers….

“Research by Dr G. David Batty and colleagues at the University of Glasgow, published in the American Journal of Public Health, compared the mental ability scores of 8,170 British boys and girls at the age of 10 with their alcohol intake and any alcohol problems when they were 30.Whereas most of the clever children grew up to drink as most people do, reasonably and moderately, the likelihood of developing a drinking problem if one were unusually bright increased 1.38 times in women and 1.17 times in men. …”

The Times Online

Hat tip to Lew Rockwell.

King Is Dead….Is King’s Dream Dead Too?

From activist Lenni Brenner:

(Brenner is the author of Zionism in the Age of the Dictators (1983) among a number of other works and writes frequently for publications from the Nation to the Jewish Guardian.

DECLARATION RE DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING’S BIRTHDAY, JANUARY 19,
AND BARACK OBAMA’S INAUGURATION, JANUARY 20th.

As if in celestial convergence, Martin Luther King’s birthday falls on the
eve of the inauguration of the nation’s first Black president. With the world
economy in free fall, amid spreading armed conflict, the classic question posed
from pulpits at this time – What would Dr. King do? – has never been more
urgent.  

January 19 and 20 are heavy with historical significance and contradiction.
Barack Obama proclaims that his presidency would be unthinkable were it not for
the civil rights struggle which King personifies. Yet he also hails John
Kennedy – who he knows criminally wiretapped King – as his role model. And is it
conceivable that King would be pleased with Obama after he broke his promise
to filibuster an electronic wiretapping bill if it included an immunity clause
for telecommunications companies that collaborated with Bush’s illegal
eavesdropping after 9/11?  

The New York Times correctly calls Obama’s orientation “center-right.” Never
an advocate of total withdrawal from Iraq, he called for the recruitment of
nearly 100,000 additional military, expanded war in Afghanistan, and more
aggressive US actions in Pakistan. In retaining Secretary of Defense Robert Gates
and other Republican Pentagon political appointees, Obama blurs the differences
between his foreign policy and George Bush’s. His United Nations ambassador,
Susan Rice, advocates “humanitarian” military intervention in Africa, and
Obama supports Bush’s latest US Africa Command (AFRICOM). He is silent on the
US-fomented war in Somalia.

Obama is also silent re the onslaught on Gaza, even as the Israeli embassy
justified it by distributing videos of his campaign statement: “If somebody was
sending rockets into my house, where my two daughters slept at night, I’m
going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect Israelis to do
the same thing.”

Domestically, Obama has put his economic portfolio into the hands of Wall
Street hacks intimately associated with financial deregulation and the
plague-like spread of derivatives and other exotic “fictional capital” –- the witch’s
brew of meltdown — and backed Bush’s banker bailout.

Is it difficult to project what Dr. King’s politics would be, were he alive
today? Faced with an administration committed to expansion of a military
already as costly as the combined armed forces of the rest of the planet, King
would join — indeed lead — a principled, active anti-war opposition.  

King called the America of his day “the greatest purveyor of violence in
the world,” and his characterization remains apt. He broke with Lyndon Johnson’s
White House, as he saw the Vietnam War obliterating the “shining moment” when
it “seemed as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor – both black
and white – through the poverty program.” On April 4, 1967, King explained that
“America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in
rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills
and money like some demonic destructive suction tube.” Domestically, Obama’s
determination to put more military “boots on the ground” in multiplying
conflicts is an update of the “demonic destructive suction tube” King opposed.
He would doubtlessly view Obama’s military posture as “a war against the poor,”
as was LBJ’s war. 

Obama’s appointments have been made, his priorities amply recorded. Given
Obama’s declared politics, King would never grant a “honeymoon” season to an
incoming administration placing government economic levers in the hands of
plundering bankers diverting huge public wealth to the feeding of the dogs of war. He
became his day’s greatest “drum major” for social justice and peace, and we
have only one alternative before us. We call upon Americans and the world to
try to act now in Dr. King’s spirit and join us in opposing any and all imperial
administrations, in the media, in the voting booth and in the streets.

Signatories (as of January 19, 2009)

Lenni Brenner, Pat Bryden, Tom Condit, Lenore Jean Daniels, Ph.D., Michael Dickinson, Ghassan El-Kadri, Vera Alice Vasques El-Kadri,
Dieter Elken, Per Fagereng, John W. Farley, Dermot Ferry, Glen Ford, John Glackin, Robert Glaser, Patricia Gray, David Halpin, Dove and Dolphin Charity, Norma J F Harrison, Tuma Hazou, Stanley Heller, Edward S. Herman, Tom Lacey, Ronit Lentin, David Letwin, Claran Mc Clean, Colm McGinn, David McReynolds, Chuck Mohan, Tinoush Moulaei, Liz Mulford,  Judith Norman, Tolu Olorunda, Margaret Parrish, Ginger Pepper, James Petras, Millie Phillips, Karen Platt, Lila Rajiva, Roland Rance, Esther Rapoport, Mel Reeves, R. B. Riddle, Eugene E. Ruyle, Al Sargis, Tony Savin, Evalyn F. Segal, Martha Abu Shawish, Roger Sheppard, Roland Sheppard, Michael J. Smith, Kwame Somburu, William Steinsmith, Stuart Troy,  C. T. Weber, Abraham Weizfeld, Derek Wharton, Jebsen & Company (Hong Kong) Ltd., Joan Wiley

Fiat Laws and Fiat Currencies (Excerpt from “Mobs, Messiahs and Markets”)

Fiat Laws and Fiat Currencies – Vico’s barbarism of reflection and gold – Lila Rajiva

(Included in “Mobs, Messiahs and Markets”)
(originally published, December, 2006) [see also  The Age of Lint by B. Bonner, 2009]*

*Link broken and repaired on January 22, 2009

(See my post entitled Email. Update: the post is now private. )


Statutory laws, the laws that get passed with pomp and circumstance in legislatures, are not the laws that really govern society. They only look like they do. But if they really did, why is it that the crimes committed by Soviet commissars or by the Nazi Gestapo. . . or by the CIA  . . were all committed with the law books bulging at the seams? It’s not how many laws you have that matters, but how well those laws are obeyed. 
Which is a matter of culture and history, of what people expect…. and what they’re prepared to accept.
And to know that takes the study of history and manners; it needs a knowledge of morals and religion. The usual smoke and mirrors sideshow supplied by the political class won’t do. You need to turn to the accumulated wisdom of case law and precedent, of customary law and conventions.
The free market arises whereever there were laws and systems like that — whether in Europe or Africa or Asia.  One way to think about this difference would be to see it as the difference between a  fiat money, like paper, and a real store of value, like gold. You can print all the money you want, but if there’s nothing to back it up, then you’re in a bit of trouble. Your creditors are unlikely to put much store in you as a credit risk, just as the world’s wringing its hands today over the dollar. Pretty soon, they come calling for their loans with cudgels and pitchforks.

Gold does not have the same problem, because there’s a limited supply of it. It has to occur in nature. It has to be found somewhere underground and then mined and refined. It’s an expensive business — that takes risk, time, and money. There are costs attached to it that some one has to pay. Paper money, on the other hand, can be printed any time you want. Just ask Ben Bernanke. He’s dropping it by the helicopter load from the clouds.

You can pass all the laws you want on the statute books, you can employ stables full of well-groomed and pedigreed lawyers. But if there’s nothing to back the laws, you’re in trouble. Businesses aren’t going to want to do business with you. Investors are going to want their investments back.

The problem arises because you can pass statutory laws as you like, even if they have little relation to how the masses of people actually think and act. That means you can have a country where theft and looting are the norm that might, nonetheless, have very intricate laws on the books against theft and looting. The statutes wouldn’t do a thing to change it.

Customary law, on the other hand, can’t be manufactured out of nothing. It grows organically from the soil in which it lives. It reflects the way people really think and act. It doesn’t run so far ahead of its times that it provokes either resistance or indifference from people. Customary law, like gold, reflects real value. And because it does, it’s also likely to be accepted by people more often. Ultimately, customary law works because it’s a more sensitive and complex measure of a society.

It contains more information from the past — from the history and traditions of the people. Like the pricing mechanism, it’s a communication system that allows people to signal their desires and expectations faster and better than they could otherwise.

Customary law doesn’t just communicate with living members of the group, as pricing does. It also reflects the desires of generations past, where statutory law reflects only the demands of one generation, the living. In that sense statutory law really isn’t democratic at all. Or, at least, not democratic enough. It only consults living citizens. It forgets the dead ones.

It’s to be expected… since statutory law is a product of pure reason.

And pure reason, Cartesian reason, is very good at technical and physical problems, but it’s not nearly as good when it’s turned on itself or on human life. Human brains aren’t made that way. We’re more likely to understand who and what we are by looking at things we’ve done in the past — which is what we call history — or things we’ve made — which is what we call culture, than by logic.

Man is, first of all, Homo faber (man the creator), and we understand him best by looking at his creations.

Customary laws work, in other words, because they come out of the history and culture of a society. They constitute verum factum (truth as an act), as the Italian philosopher Giambattista Vico wrote in 1710. 

“The criterion and rule of the true is to have made it. Accordingly, our clear and distinct idea of the mind cannot be a criterion of the mind itself, still less of other truths. For while the mind perceives itself, it does not make itself,” said Vico.

As more and more of our world is no longer made by us, we understand it less and less. We’re forced to fall back on theory and speculation, on isolated reasoning.

But thinking, as Vico pointed out, is hopeless when it remains isolated reason. It has to include practical wisdom and rhetoric. The Cartesian cogito ergo sum (I think therefore I am) is just not enough.

Vico liked to argue that the rise of pure rationality in history was one signal of a declining phase of human culture. He called it the barbarie della reflessione (the barbarism of reflection) and said that it characterized what he called The Age of Man.

This was the last phase of his cycle of civilizations. In the Age of Man, popular democracy would run amok and lead to tyranny and empires, which would end in chaos. Then the whole cycle would begin again, with the age of the gods. And so it goes on from eon to eon, said Vico. It makes you wonder. Does anyone ever learn?

Lila Rajiva

Excerpted from Minding the Crowd, Dissident Voice

 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Dec06/Rajiva30.htm

Copyright, December 2006,  All Rights Reserved

Global Games: Great Apes’ Lives Threatened By Palm Oil Production

“Hoping to unravel the mysteries of human origin, anthropologist Louis Leakey sent three young women to Africa and Asia to study our closest relatives: It was chimpanzees for Jane Goodall, mountain gorillas for Dian Fossey and the elusive, solitary orangutans for Birute Mary Galdikas.

Nearly four decades later, 62-year-old Galdikas, the least famous of his “angels,” is the only one still at it. And the red apes she studies in Indonesia are on the verge of extinction because forests are being clear-cut and burned to make”There are only an estimated 50,000 to 60,000 orangutans left in the wild, 90 percent of them in Indonesia, said Serge Wich, a scientist at the Great Ape Trust of Iowa. Most live in small, scattered populations that cannot take the onslaught on the forests much longer.

Trees are being cut at a rate of 300 football fields every hour. And massive land-clearing fires have turned the country into one of the top emitters of carbon.

Tanjung Puting, which has 1,600 square miles, clings precariously to the southern tip of Borneo island. Its 6,000 orangutans — one of the two largest populations on the planet, together with the nearby Sebangau National Park — are less vulnerable to diseases and fires.

That has allowed them, to a degree, to live and evolve as they have for millions of years……..”I am not an alarmist,” says Galdikas, speaking calmly but deliberately, her brow slightly furrowed. “But I would say, if nothing is done, orangutan populations outside of national parks have less than 10 years left.”

More from  from AP here.

Comments:

Having often had to face families of aggressive, prowling monkeys on the way home from school, I’m firmly on the side of man when he goes mano a chimpo for survival. But there’s no reason to despoil the sacred heritage of nature when survival is not the issue. Land usage – part of the commons – is something that can be subject to government intervention, in my opinion.

I know this sounds anti-libertarian. It isn’t really, because dogmatic libertarianism in these areas ends up destroying its own foundation.

When land is ravaged by massive unrestricted development and speculation-driven usage (think of the vast over-cultivation of soy in Argentina that’s led to the depletion of its soil), that has to encroach on the liberty…indeed survival… of everyone on the planet.

Again, the problem is size. Libertarianism simply doesn’t work for a one-world society.

The answer to that is not to go collectivist. It’s to get rid of the idea of  a  one-world society. We want as many worlds as possible.

The socialists like to say, a different world is possible.

I like to say, a different world is impossible.

Because there’s no such thing as a world. Once you start thinking of a world you want to change, you’ll end up with the same problems  – only somewhere else.