Dead Americans Returned from Libya, Bomb Threats at Home: 'Same Old, Same Old'

'Yankee go home' has been replaced by 'the great Satan America,' but other than that I tend to see what's been happening overseas as more of the 'same old, same old.'

In Libya, four Americans were killed on Tuesday. I rather hope that someone's going to figure our why embassy security was, ah, modified:

"...sources have told the BBC that on the advice of a US diplomatic regional security officer, the mission in Benghazi was not given the full contract despite lobbying by private contractors.

"Instead, the US consulate was guarded externally by a force of local Libyan militia, many of whom reportedly put down their weapons and fled once the mission came under concerted attack...."
(BBC News)

Some details of what happened during that attack are public knowledge: but not why the attack happened, or who planned it. Much as I'd like to know exactly what Libyan and American officials know and guess about the attack, I think they're acting sensibly.

Blurting out sensitive information, or off-the-cuff exclamations make for exciting news: but I don't think it would be good for most Libyans or Americans at this point. What we do know is more tantalizing than enlightening:

"...Four people have been arrested in connection with the attack that left Stevens and the three other Americans dead, the top aide to the president of the Libyan parliament said Friday.

"Those arrested were not directly tied to the attack, Monem Elyasser, the chief aide to Prime Minister Mustafa Abushagur, told CNN by telephone.

"Elyasser did not release the identities of the four suspects in custody, nor did he detail the allegations against them.

"The announcement came as the United States is struggling to determine whether a militant group planned the attack that killed the four Americans...."
(CNN)

Meanwhile, quite a few folks in other parts of the Middle East are expressing the usual anti-American sentiment. I'm pretty sure that this does not 'prove' that:

• Everything is the fault of
  • America
  • The Jews
  • Islam
  • Democrats
  • Republicans
• America should
  • Pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist
  • Bomb Libya
  • Arrest all Muslims
  • Apologize for offending someone

Meanwhile, bomb threats affected routines at some American universities: including one of my Alma Maters, NDSU. Those threats resulted in no explosions, but quite a few questions.

I have no idea who made the bomb threats: but I'm not terribly surprised that they happened. We just passed the September 11 anniversary, and some major issues are at stake in the coming November election. Threatening to kill college students isn't a reasonable response to America's domestic situation: and that's another topic.

Somewhat-related posts:

• "Remembering September 11, 2001; and Looking Ahead"
  (September 11, 2012)
• "Tolerance, Change, America, and the World"
  (March 22, 2012)
• "Bombs, Berserk Vendors, and Getting a Grip"
  (January 20, 2012)
• "A Blast, Bullets, Bodies, Norway, and Getting a Grip"
  (July 22, 2011)
• "Religious Freedom, Niemöller, and Muslims in America"
  A Catholic Citizen in America (April 7, 2011)

In the news:

• "Texas, North Dakota universities re-opened after bomb scares"
  Corrie MacLaggan, Reuters (September 14, 2012)
• "Remains of consulate attack victims returned, as Marines arrive in Yemen amid more protests"
  FoxNews.com (September 14, 2012)
• "Bodies of 4 Americans killed in Libya returned to U.S."
  CNN (September 14, 2012)
• "US consulate in Benghazi 'did not have enough security' "
  Frank Gardner, BBC News Middle East (September 14, 2012)

IMF Hacked, Again - or - 'This isn't Cyberwar: It Just Acts Like Cyberwar'?!

I really hope that the key people who may have clicked the wrong link, or opened the wrong attachment, are a trifle less clueless than Dilbert's manager:



Still, there have been a lot of hack attacks so far this year.

Big ones:

• Sony
• Lockheed Martin
• Oak Ridge
• L-3 Communications
• Grumman
  (see June 1, 2011)

Now we hear that the IMF's network has been compromised.

Again.

I hope I don't seem overly-concerned: but it's hard for me to shake the impression that all is not well with corporate and government information networks. Sure: Hacking Sony's Playstation database isn't quite like the International Monitory Fund network leaking. I include Sony's cyber-security woes in that list, because ideally a company as savvy as Sony shouldn't have let that happen.

Something, I think, has gone wrong with too many major commercial and government networks this year.

So, do I think it's time to run in circles and scream like a demented cat? No: That does not appear to be a reasonable approach.

On the other hand, I very sincerely hope that the White House cyber security coordinator has some response in mind. Besides calling cyber war a "turbo metaphor:" one that doesn't quite fit the sort of espionage we've been seeing. I think he's got a point, by the way, about staying calm:

• "Emotions, the Frontal Cortex, The War on Terror, Anarchists, and the Illuminati"
  (December 23, 2008)

Here's what got me started with this post:

"IMF hit by 'very major' cyber security attack"
US & Canada, BBC News (June 11, 2011)

"The International Monetary Fund (IMF) says it has been targeted by a sophisticated cyber attack.

"Officials at the fund gave few details but said the attack earlier this year had been 'a very major breach' of its systems, the New York Times reports.

"Cyber security officials said the hack was designed to install software to create a 'digital insider presence'.

"The IMF, which holds sensitive economic data about many countries, said its operations were fully functional.

"The cyber attack took place over several months, and happened before former IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn was arrested over sexual assault charges...."

"...A cyber security expert told Reuters the infiltration had been a targeted attack, which installed software designed to give a nation state a 'digital insider presence' at the IMF.

" 'The code was developed and released for this purpose,' said Tom Kellerman, who has worked for the Fund...."

'Epidemic' Sounds Dramatic

I think there are a whole lot of hack attacks happening - major ones - this year. I also am a little cautious when someone uses emotive terms like "epidemic."

Still, these anonymous "experts" may be right.

"Targeted cyber attacks an 'epidemic'"
Maggie Shiels, Technology, BBC News (June 2, 2011)

"The targeted attack used by hackers to compromise e-mail accounts of top US officials is reaching 'epidemic' proportions, say security experts.

"The scam, known as spear phishing, was used in a bid to get passwords of Gmail accounts so they could be monitored.

"Via a small number of customised messages it tries to trick people into visiting a web page that looks genuine so users type in login names.

"Such attacks are often aimed at top officials or chief executives.

"Such attacks are not new, say security professionals, but they are becoming more commonplace.

" 'What is happening more and more is the targeting of a couple of high value individuals with the one goal of acquiring valuable information and valuable data,' said Dan Kaminsky, chief scientist at security firm DKH...."

'This isn't War - It Just Acts Like War?!'

Or, famous last words?

"Cyber war threat exaggerated claims security expert"
Maggie Shiels, Technology, BBC News (February 16, 2011)

"The threat of cyber warfare is greatly exaggerated, according to a leading security expert.

"Bruce Schneier claims that emotive rhetoric around the term does not match the reality.

"He warned that using sensational phrases such as 'cyber armageddon' only inflames the situation.

"Mr Schneier, who is chief security officer for BT, is due to address the RSA security conference in San Francisco this week

"Speaking ahead of the event, he told BBC News that there was a power struggle going on, involving a 'battle of metaphors'.

"He suggested that the notion of a cyber war was based on several high-profile incidents from recent years.

"They include blackouts in Brazil in 1998, attacks by China on Google in 2009 and the Stuxnet virus that attacked Iran's nuclear facilities.

"He also pointed to the fallout from Wikileaks and the hacking of Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin's e-mail.

" 'What we are seeing is not cyber war but an increasing use of war-like tactics and that is what is confusing us...'..."

"...His point of view was backed by Howard Schmidt, cyber security co-ordinator for the White House.

" 'We really need to define this word because words do matter,' said Mr Schmidt.

" 'Cyber war is a turbo metaphor that does not address the issues we are looking at like cyber espionage, cyber crime, identity theft, credit card fraud...."

Okay: no turbo metaphors.

The IMF has been hacked. Again.

American defense contractors have been hacked. Several Times. This year. And the year isn't half-over yet.

Still, it could be worse.

Hey, the North American power grid is still working: right?

So, hey: how bad can it get? (June 1, 2011)

Like I said: Famous last words?

Related posts:

• "Gmail, China, Knee-Jerk Response, and the Information Age"
  (June 4, 2011)
• "Pentagon's New(ish) Policy About Hack Attacks"
  (May 31, 2011)
• "China, Paper on How to Bring Down USA Power Grid: All a Big Misunderstanding?"
  (March 20, 2010)
• "International Monetary Fund Allegedly Hacked - And It's Not News"
  (November 14, 2008)
• "Lehman Collapsed, the World Bank's Been Hacked, General Motor's not Bankrupt - Maybe: What a Mess!"
  (October 12, 2008)

In the news:

• "IMF hit by 'very major' cyber security attack"
  US & Canada, BBC News (June 11, 2011)

'Rush Limbaugh Shot Giffords!?' Opinion Polls, Tuscon, and Loughner's Mind

'If 300,000,000 people really believe in a stupid idea: It's still a stupid idea.'

I think opinion polls are interesting: and reflect what the folks who were polled feel.

I also think opinion polls are important for marketing professionals, politicians, and network programmers: whose jobs involve dealing with the opinions of some segment of the population.

As a reflection of reality, though: I don't think opinion polls are all that accurate.

Even when they seem to support something I think is true, like "flossing between meals is good for your teeth." In that example, I'd be much more interested in what dentists and medical researchers had learned: and could prove.

Blame Game and Assumptions

It's very easy, I think, to assume that folks who don't share one's views are evil. I've run into assertions that Jared Lee Loughner has a Satanic temple of sorts in his home - and, of course, that Sarah Palin is to blame for Mr. Loughner's killing a half-dozen people.

It wasn't the same person making those assertions, and I don't take either all that seriously.

Or, rather, I don't take the 'Satanic temple' claim all that seriously. Given the assumptions of America's dominant culture, and the common sense of the rest of us, my opinion is that we're not likely to see a pogrom started based on the assumption that demon-worshipers are threatening national security.

Action against Ron Paul supporters, maybe: and that's another topic. (March 23, 2009) Almost.

I've discussed emotions and reason before:

• "Emotions, the Frontal Cortex, The War on Terror, Anarchists, and the Illuminati"
  (December 23, 2008)

Bottom line: in my considered opinion when emotions are high, logic is not a big factor in how folks respond.

'The Other Guy's' Opinions are Hate Speech?

As I said, it's easy to assume that folks who hold views that contradict one's own are to blame when something goes wrong. I think that's part of the reason why we got 'hate speech' legislation in this country - and that's almost another topic.

I don't think it's any surprise that some of America's old-school information gatekeepers, like the folks who control media like television news, decided quite quickly that conservatives were to blame for killing that 9-year-old girl and wounding Giffords. 'Obviously,' saying things like 'we'll fight for our right to express our opinion' is an open invitation to kill pre-teens, and a threat to national security. When the 'wrong sort' say it, anyway.

Just like, back in my 'good old days,' it was 'obvious' to quite a few folks that the commies were to blame for everything they didn't like. I don't think we'll see McCarthyism again: This isn't post-WWII America, and 'the establishment' doesn't include the same lot who decided it would be a good idea to hunt commies.

Human nature hasn't changed, though: not as far as I can tell anyway. It's still easy to assume that 'the other guy' should keep those dangerous views to him- or herself.

"Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik got plenty of attention when he quickly pinned the blame for the assassination attempt on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., on conservatives, Rush Limbaugh and even Republican opposition to the 'progress' being sought by his fellow Democrats.

"But it has now been revealed that Dupnik's department had prior interaction with suspect Jared Loughner. The department is still holding back details of the calls, but has now confirmed that deputies made multiple visits to the Lougner home in recent years...."
(FoxNews.com)

The news source I used for that excerpt isn't part of the old-school media establishment: which, in my opinion, is part of why the article didn't put the 'right' spin on Sheriff Dupnik's remarks.

What's a bit surprising, to me, is what's showing up in the more familiar new outlets:

"A majority of Americans reject the view that heated political rhetoric was a factor in the weekend shootings in Arizona which killed six and critically wounded a congresswoman, a CBS News poll said on Tuesday.

"Since the Saturday incident in which Arizona Representative Gabrielle Giffords was shot at point-blank range, various politicians and commentators have said a climate in which strong language and ideological polarization is common may have contributed to the attack.

"Some of the analysts cited anti-government statements from the man arrested in the shooting, Jared Lee Loughner, as support for that view.

"But CBS said its nationwide telephone poll found that, '57 percent of respondents said the harsh political tone had nothing to do with the shooting, compared to 32 percent who felt it did.'..."
(Reuters)

I'm a tad leery of secondhand reports, like "CBS said." I'd rather read what a resource actually wrote - not what someone else says was written. So, from CBS News:

"Forty-five percent of Americans believe that Jared Loughner's political views were "probably" a factor in the shootings in Tucson Saturday, a new CBS News poll shows. One in three say they probably were not a factor, while 22 percent say they do not know.

"Loughner has not cooperated with investigators in the wake of the shooting, and evidence suggests he held muddled political views far outside the mainstream. Many partisans have nonetheless tried to link the alleged shooter to the right or left.

"The poll also shows that while three in four Americans say violence against the government is never justified, 16 percent say it can be justified -- the same percentage that said as much in April. Twenty-eight percent of Republicans said such violence can be justified, compared with 11 percent of Democrats and independents. ..."
(CBS News)

That's interesting. Quite interesting. Not because I think the poll results have much to do with Loughner's motives, but for what they show about the attitude of whoever CBS News decided to ask.

Which gets into statistics, sampling error, propaganda - and those are other topics.

'He's Crazy - Lock Him Up?'

I don't think it's any surprise to learn that Mr. Loughner isn't your average young man from Arizona. Most folks, from any state, aren't all that likely to open fire on a crowd of people near a grocery. If that were the case, the carnage in Tuscon wouldn't have been particularly newsworthy, outside Arizona. Just as we generally don't hear about traffic accidents in Flagstaff. In my opinion.

Oddly enough, Mr. Loughner doesn't seem to be particularly political: in any direction.

"Arizona massacre gunman Jared Loughner's downward spiral may have been touched off by a broken high school romance and fueled by drug use -- but it was not politically motivated, according to his best friend in high school.

"Zach Osler, in an interview Wednesday with ABC's 'Good Morning America,' said: 'He did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn't listen to political radio. He didn't take sides. He wasn't on the left. He wasn't on the right.'

"Media speculation swirled after Loughner allegedly opened fire at a Tucson rally last Saturday, critically wounding Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and 13 others and killing six. Immediately, the Tucson sheriff and liberal pundits and lawmakers chimed in that the shooting somehow was politically motivated and a result of the extreme rhetoric being used by conservatives such as Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.

"But Osler said Loughner wasn't shooting at people, 'he was shooting at the world.'..."

"Osler's admission comes as blame for the national tragedy continues to be cast everything from Arizona's immigration law, to Sarah Palin, to charged rhetoric in the political arena rather than apparent mental illness.

"In an e-mail to students and staff at University of California-Berkeley on Monday, Chancellor Robert Birgeneau blamed the shooting that killed six and wounded U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords -- and 13 others -- squarely on the state's controversial immigration law S.B. 1070 while acknowledging Jared Lee Loughner was 'profoundly disturbed.'

" 'A climate in which demonization of others goes unchallenged and hateful speech is tolerated can lead to such a tragedy,' the e-mail read. 'I believe it is not a coincidence that this calamity has occurred in a state which has legislated discrimination against undocumented persons.' "
FoxNews.com

That's familiar enough to me: 'those people over there' practice "demonization of others," while epithets like "male chauvinist pig" are hailed as part of the liberation of women from legalized rape.¹

With 20-20 hindsight, it's easy to see that someone might have prevented Mr. Loughner from killing those folks in Tuscon.

I'm also rather glad that a sheriff, high school buddy, or 'concerned citizen' can't call 'Mental Sanitation Department,' or whatever the bureau would be called - and have Jared Loughner shipped off to some asylum where he'd never be seen again.

And that's another topic.

Related posts:

• "Rambling About Tucson, Sudan, and Prudence"
  A Catholic Citizen in America (January 9, 2011)
• "Arizona Representative Gabrielle Giffords Shot: Utterly Unacceptable"
  Apathetic Lemming of the North (January 8, 2011)
• "Actions have Consequences: Burning the Quran"
  (September 7, 2010)
• "Police Abuse: America isn't Russia"
  (February 19, 2010)

In the news:

• "Report: Arizona Gunman Was Not Motivated By Politics"
  FoxNews.com (January 12, 2011)
• "Dupnik’s Department Knew Loughners; Obama Will Skip Politics; Gun Control Fight Brewing"
  FoxNews.com (January 12, 2011
• "Majority doesn't blame rhetoric for Giffords shooting"
  Reuters (January 11, 2011)
• "Poll: 45% Say Politics Motivated Jared Loughner"
  CBS News (January 11, 2011)

---

¹ Crazy feminism seems to be on the way out: but we're still cleaning up the fallout, in my opinion. More about that in another blog:

• "Legalized Rape, Brightly Burning Bras, and Fitting In"
  A Catholic Citizen in America (May 8, 2010)

A Chilly Cell, the AP, the CIA, and Emotions

An AP story, about the death of a "militant" in a CIA prison:

"More than seven years ago, a suspected Afghan militant was brought to a dimly lit CIA compound northeast of the airport in Kabul. The CIA called it the Salt Pit. Inmates knew it as the dark prison.

"Inside a chilly cell, the man was shackled and left half-naked. He was found dead, exposed to the cold, in the early hours of Nov. 20, 2002.

"The Salt Pit death was the only fatality known to have occurred inside the secret prison network the CIA operated abroad after the Sept. 11 attacks. The death had strong repercussions inside the CIA. It helped lead to a review that uncovered abuses in detention and interrogation procedures, and forced the agency to change those procedures...."
(The Associated Press)

Anyone who likes perfection, instant gratification, and universal niceness, will not like the CIA, or the American judicial system. I'm no fan of America's Department of Justice myself: largely because of what I continue to view as ideologically-motivated efforts to achieve social engineering. A catchphrase describing that sort of thing has been "legislating from the bench." We may be emerging from that - interesting - period. Which is another topic.

What, if Anything, does This Article Show?

I don't know that I'd fault The Associated Press for the article's second paragraph:

"Inside a chilly cell, the man was shackled and left half-naked. He was found dead, exposed to the cold, in the early hours of Nov. 20, 2002."

Yes, it paints a vivid picture, and uses emotive terms when more clinical ones could have been employed. But news services are businesses. One of their primary goals is to make a profit. Experience seems to show that strumming on people's heartstrings is an effective way to sell newspapers.

And The Associated Press made what might be viewed as a remarkable statement in the third paragraph:

"...The death had strong repercussions inside the CIA. It helped lead to a review that uncovered abuses in detention and interrogation procedures, and forced the agency to change those procedures...."

Reform? CIA?? As something that's happened?! Not as something tearfully called for by the Society for the Liberation of Chilly Half-Naked Prisoners? There are days when I think that an acknowledgment by a traditional news service that the CIA did something right is news in itself.

The AP makes up for that (error?) a bit later in this article:

"...The CIA's program of waterboarding and other harsh treatment of suspected terrorists has been debated since it ended in 2006. The Salt Pit case stands as a cautionary tale about the unfettered use of such practices. The Obama administration shut the CIA's prisons last year.

"It remains uncertain whether any intelligence officers have been punished as a result of the Afghan's death, raising questions about the CIA's accountability in the case. The CIA's then-station chief in Afghanistan was promoted after Rahman's death, and the officer who ran the prison went on to other assignments, including one overseas, several former intelligence officials said.

"The CIA declined to discuss the Salt Pit case and denied a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by the AP...."
(The Associated Press)

I'll repeat the first paragraph of that excerpt again.

"...The CIA's program of waterboarding and other harsh treatment of suspected terrorists has been debated since it ended in 2006. The Salt Pit case stands as a cautionary tale about the unfettered use of such practices. The Obama administration shut the CIA's prisons last year...."

The AP doesn't actually say that waterboarding is what killed that "militant." But I think an argument can be made that it's implied. Hats off, in a way: the paragraph is, to the best of my knowledge, factually accurate.

And, I think just as important: the AP acknowledges that the CIA has reformed its practices. Yes, it was "forced to:" but I suspect that since the article does not mention who or what applied the force, it wasn't the Obama administration or a 'concerned citizens' outfit.

I learned about "checks and balances" in high school. The American system has them built into its government. The people who wrote the Constitution apparently realized that this new country's government would be staffed by human beings: and that we're not perfect. Oversight - intelligent oversight - is important.

Although it's the "fourth estate," and not a formally-recognized part of government, I think the press is in effect a sort of 'check and balance' on governmental institutions. Which is one reason why I think the Freedom of Information Act was a good idea.

I also think that allowing some requests for information to be denied is a good idea.

"...The CIA declined to discuss the Salt Pit case and denied a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by the AP...."

Do I think the CIA is trying to cover up something? Of course I do! They'd jolly well better be trying to cover up those details of their operation which could get their agents and American citizens killed.

It's possible, of course, that the CIA is engaged in some sort of plot to enslave the world, stifle freedom, and kill fur seals. Maybe that's why they denied the AP's request. Or maybe the CIA is more interested in protecting Americans, than in selling newspapers.

Related posts:

• "Police Abuse: America isn't Russia"
  (February 19, 2010)
• "News Stories You're Not Supposed to Know About"
  (December 31, 2009)
• "Imperialist American Aggressors Attack Poland?"
  (October 30, 2009)
• "Attack on New York City Thwarted; or Your Constitutional Rights Threatened: Depends on Your Point of View"
  (October 6, 2009)
• "Afghanistan, a Reporter and a Couple of Dead Guys, and the News"
  (September 9, 2009)
• "'America Tortured Prisoners' - Here We Go Again"
  (August 25, 2009)
• "What is an Information Gatekeeper?"
  (August 14, 2009)
• "Abu Ghraib: Abuse and Sexual Humiliation by American Soldiers in the News Again"
  (January 25, 2009)
• "Emotions, the Frontal Cortex, The War on Terror, Anarchists, and the Illuminati"
  (December 23, 2008)
• "Army Report: Big Mistakes in Iraq!"
  (June 30, 2008)
• "Waterboarding, Moralizing, Politics, and Security"
  (April 23, 2009)
• "Japanese Court, Okinawa, Kenzaburo Oe: There's a Lesson Here"
  (April 5, 2008)
• " 'The Army is Unraveling' - Just Like Vietnam!"
  (March 19, 2008)
• "Top Newspaper's Journalists Praised: Blackout Imposed on Praise"
  (October 15, 2007)

In the news:

• "AP INVESTIGATION: Details in CIA detainee's death"
  The Associated Press (March 28, 2010)

Emotions, the Frontal Cortex, the War on Terror, Anarchists, and the Illuminati

The War on Terror is an emotional topic.

I was told recently that as emotions rise, the frontal cortex goes offline: which is important, since that's where we do most of our higher-level thinking.

Stick with me: This post isn't as off-topic as it may look. Although I'll admit to writing it mostly as an excuse to share a hilarious collection of dire predictions.

People on many ends of the political and philosophical spectra have gotten so excited that their frontal cortices seem to have shut down entirely. That may explain some of the odd opinions, presented as facts, flying around: like monkey fewmets in the primate house.

Emotion Trumping Reason: Not Limited to the War on Terror

Being born during the Truman administration has some advantages: like the opportunity to notice what changes, and what doesn't. When I was in school, experts said there would probably be another ice age soon. The year I graduated from high school, a butterfly expert, Paul Ehrlich, made quite a name for himself:

• "By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth's population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people." (1969)
• "By 1980 the United States would see its life expectancy drop to 42 because of pesticides, and by 1999 its population would drop to 22.6 million." (1969)
  (source: igreens.org.uk)

The best and brightest applauded his intelligence and foresight, and heartily adopted his views. Despite America's - and Earth's - population stubbornly refusing to follow his prediction, some still do.

Don't misunderstand me: I think it's a good idea not to eat pesticides. But, as I wrote earlier:

"I've been around the block enough times to realize that if there's a viewpoint, like 'vegetables are good for you,' 'we shouldn't mistreat criminals,' or 'it's okay to earn money,' there will be people who take the idea, and run with it: straight off the edge of sanity. And they're likely to be the ones shouting loudest about the idea."
("Obama Critic Deported: It's a Plot, of Course" (October 8, 2008))

It Killed the Loch Ness Monster, and Now It's Coming For YOU!!!

I think that some of these people sincerely believe what they've said. Global warming, we've been told, will lead to:

• Overpopulation, which leads to Cannibalism
  (Ted Turner)
• The Death of the Loch Ness Monster
  (Robert Rines)
• Beer Gets More Expensive
  (Jim Salinger)
• Pythons Take Over America
  (The U.S. Geological Survey and the Fish and Wildlife Service, as reported in USAToday.com)
• Kidney Stones
  (A University of Texas study)
• Skinny Whales
  (Some Japanese scientists)
• Shark Attacks
  (George Burgess)
• Black Hawk Down
  (Massachusetts congressman Edward Markey)
• Frozen Penguin Babies
  (Jon Bowermaster)
• Killer Stingray Invasion
  (Alex Gerrard)
  (source: FOXNews.com)

Sounds dire, and I might take this more seriously, if

• The coming ice age hadn't been replaced by global warming as the Big Crisis
• Paul Ehrlich's application of Malthusian principles had actually happened
• I didn't know that it would be odd - and very disturbing - if Earth wasn't warming up, on average, right now

There's been an ice age on, you know.

The thing is, though, that the idea of Big Oil and hair spray being responsible for global warming isn't held by all scientists. Particularly, I'd think, those who have been studying climate change on places like Mars.

But I'm getting seriously off track here.

The War on Terror: It's Okay to be Scared

I'm personally more than a bit upset that there are people who think that flying airliners into the New York City World Trade Center and the Pentagon was a good idea.

But being upset isn't an excuse for not thinking. If anything, a high-risk period like this is a time when a person's thought process should be particularly rational.

---Which Reminds Me of an Amusing Story

Skimming through earlier posts, I ran across a one about a 1920 terrorist attack on New York City. At the time, I realized that nobody seemed to have realized that the 9/11 attack could be viewed as an Anarchist plot to avenge the Sacco/Vanzetti indictments.

And so, being in a pawkish frame of mind, I made one up. By the time I was through, anarchists, astrology, Mecca, and the Illuminati were involved in the 9/11 attack. If I'd kept at it a little longer, I'd have worked in Elvis, Marilyn Monroe, and the Kennedys.

Related Posts:

• "Obama's a Radical Muslim; McCain's a Racist: Facts, Mud and the Anonymous Expert"
  (October 7, 2008)
• "9/11 and What They Want You to Believe"
  (September 11, 2008)
• "Assumptions; the Ames Anthrax Strain; Ames, Iowa, and Fort Deterick"
  (August 15, 2008)
• "911 Was an Inside Job! Our Boys Need to Know!"
  (June 10, 2008)

News and views:

• "No Matter What Happens, Someone Will Blame Global Warming"
  FOXNews (December 23, 2008)
• "Mars Wobbles Created Climate Swings "
  Space.com (December 4, 2008)
• "Climate change hits Mars"
  TimesOnline (April 29, 2007)
• "Gone With the Martian Wind"
  Space.com (April 26, 2007)
• "Mars Emerging from Ice Age, Data Suggest"
  Space.com (December 8, 2003)

Background:

• "Climate Change"
  Paleomap (April 20, 2002)

McCain Had A Stroke! Look at His Left Eye!!

(Updated September 25, 2008)

Probably not, and Barack Obama isn't a Muslim.

However, this issue seems a bit more reasonable than the 'Jews and blacks can't trust moose hunters' warning we heard yesterday. If the worst-case scenario that some political enthusiasts seem to hope for is true, Mr. McCain may have a medical condition that requires prompt attention. And, one that could affect his performance in office.

Whether there's any factual basis for the latest buzz remains to be seen. I just hope that voters distinguish between reality and desire, or fear, on November 4.

In the news (appearing in Google's news search):

• "What happened to John McCain's left eye?"
  GaySocialite.com (September 25, 20080
  • "...Now everyone is asking, "What happened to John McCain's left eye?" Did he have a stroke?..."
• "John McCain's left eye affliction: not stroke but Bell's Palsy?"
  InEntertainment (September 25, 2008)
  • "...At first people thought that he might have suffered a stroke at some stage, but according to a number of Internet sources, he has Bell’s palsy or facial paralysis. This condition is temporary, but it does take some time to correct itself...."
• "Is John McCain having a melanoma relapse?"
  The Young Turks (September 25, 2008)
  • ".Droopy eyes, $5000 worth of 'American Idol' make up and cancelled [!] campaign events... something is rotten in the state of the Repubican [!] Campaign, and it might be McCain's health....
  • "...one of the possible explainations [!] that could fit with his symptom is a stroke....
  • "...The droop on the left side of the face very well could be the sign of pressure on the right hemisphere of the brain...."
  • "...'Damage to the right hemisphere of the brain leads to cognitive-communication problems, such as impaired memory, attention problems and poor reasoning. In many cases, the person with right brain damage is not aware of the problems that he or she is experiencing (anosognosia).'
  • "This pretty much explains everything that has been going on with the McCain campaign for the last week actually...."

As I explained in a previous post, this blog isn't political, but politics do affect the War on Terror.

---

Update (September 26, 2008)

The hype about McCain's health has hit the news. There's an ad out, warning that McCain is probably so sick that he'll drop dead.

"Liberal Groups Attack McCain's Health"
CBS News (September 25, 2008)

• "(WASHINGTON) Two liberal political action committees, Brave New PAC and Democracy for America, launched an aggressive attack on John McCain's health this morning in an ad featuring unflattering images of his melanoma scars. The ad calls for McCain to release his medical records, something he already did earlier this year.
• "...The ad closes with a graphic asking, 'Why won't John McCain release his Medical Records?'
• "In addition to the ad, the groups initiated a petition for doctors with the hopes that with enough signatures they will 'ultimately deliver the petition and create enough grassroots support to get a full disclosure of the [medical] records,' Brave New PAC spokesman Axel Woolfolk told CBS News. So far they say they have collected 2,500 signatures.
• "However, the thing is, McCain has released his medical records...."

There's some very serious entertainment value in aspects of this presidential campaign. If the stakes weren't so high, I'd be able to enjoy it a lot more.

Lies, Quagmires, and Straight Thinking

My suspicions have been confirmed.

The president of the United States, and members of intelligence communities around the world, are human beings. And, they make mistakes.

The story broke in "Yahoo! News and "Politico."

You have to read between the lines, but the evidence is clear: These people are human beings, and can make mistakes!

"A question submitted from the online audience asked Bush whether he felt he had been misled about Iraq as he made the decision to go to war.

" ' "Misled" is a strong word,' he said. 'Not only our intelligence community, but intelligence communities all across the world shared the same assessment. And so I was disappointed to see how flawed our intelligence was.'

" 'Do I think somebody lied to me? No, I don't. I think it was just, you know, they analyzed the situation and came up with the wrong conclusion,' he added. "

I'm inclined to believe the president. Analyzing intelligence is tricky, but the best analysis in the world will be wrong if the data isn't accurate. It's the old 'GIGO' principle: Garbage In, Garbage Out. Gathering accurate intelligence data is tricky, because many countries - particularly the naughtier ones - don't seem willing to give accurate and complete accounts of what their supplies are, and what they plan to do with them.

One solution would be for the United Nations Security Council to draft a resolution, making it a rule that all countries would send each other complete reports on their military status.

I doubt, and hope, that not many people think a resolution like that, noble as it might be, would have much practical effect.

Unless people like the junta that's sabotaging relief efforts in Burma become peace-loving, generous, open, trusting leaders, gathering intelligence will be a dicey proposition at best.

Americans have a presidential election coming up. It is my fervent hope that American citizens who vote will set aside a little time, take deep breath, get informed, and think about their decision.

This is a time for reason and facts, not emotional reactions. All candidates are human beings, who live in an imperfect world. The past has shown that mistakes happen, and that the best data available isn't always accurate. The trick will be to figure out which candidate is least likely to use poor judgment, based on the information available.

On a brighter note, I haven't encountered the word "quagmire" recently. Perhaps someone has spread the word among those of a particular persuasion, that there are very few rice paddies in the Middle East. ("Quagmire: Now and Forever, it Seems" (November 11, 2007)).

Nero Was Working for the Christians: Who Knew?

A post in this blog, " 'Inside Islam: Faith vs. Fanatics:' Arizona" got a very interesting comment today.

The gist of it is that the Crusades were bad, and the "Jews were kicked out of Israel by the Romans in the name of Christianity." (In about 70 AD - who knew?!)

And, of course, the Christian attack on Muslims is done by: "Murderers in uniform. Terrorists in uniform. Rapists in uniform. Then these blood-sucking hindus."

It's interesting reading, from several points of view.

Quite seriously: I think this is an excellent insight into the alternatively-factual history and view of current events which many people, Islamic and otherwise, use as a basis for decisions.

Also, I think that the comment is a good example of emotion overcoming reason.

Related posts, on "Who Knew? Assertions and Assumptions from All Over"