Mother
seeking support, cursed at for questioning
war
One
mother's war after Son
survived suicide bomb
Marsha
Walker's son survived a suicide bomb in Iraq.
Her daughter spent a year in Kuwait last year, and
her
father is a former Marine reservist. She’s part
of a military family;
she and her sister went into
criminal justice because their father
dissuaded them
from a military career. Marsha is a Blue Star mother, meaning a mother whose son is serving overseas.
So it came
as a bit of a surprise when an email exchange
with her local Blue
Star chapter concluded with an
expletive: "fuckoff."
The Ohio mom had contacted her local chapter after
coming
across their website earlier this month. It’s
a plain, bright page,
one that doesn’t stand out at
first glance.
But there was something that caught her eye: an animate montage of planes hitting the World Trade Center and
the resulting
aftermath. In one image, a man in a
bloodstained shirt teeters on the
verge of collapse,
in another, a panicked crowd looks on in horror.
None
of the photographs reference current U.S. military
operations
in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Beneath the graphic is a live clock: "War was declared
on the United States of America, 1,414
days, 15 hours,
49 minutes and 12 seconds ago," referring to the
attacks
of Sept. 11, 2001.
"They’re trying to make a connection between Iraq
and 9/11,"
she asserts. "I guess that's supposed to
make parents feel better in
some way but only the
uninformed ones–because if you're informed, it
infuriates
you."
After seeing the site, which was taken down after an inquiry by RAW STORY, she dispatched an
email.
Hello. I am a blue star mom of
two reservist
soldiers. My 20-year-old-son is "Soldier of the Month" and has been awarded the Purple Heart. He
is a reservist with
the Ohio National Guard.
"I am
not a “Spartan mother” and I feel no
need to sacrifice my children’s
lives for this war.
People willing to give their children’s lives for the war in Iraq are grossly misinformed, and I question
their love
for their children and their country...
"I do not see any reference to groups that
many
blue and gold star families may not be aware
of. I realize you are
not a political organization,
but I am not going to stand by idle,
wearing a pin,
while my son's life and other soldier’s lives continueto be misused for a cause that is not reality based.
911 had
NOTHING to do with Iraq or Saddam-your website,
much like this
President’s talking points do not
balance with the truth of this
situation. Please
give your members something besides more hand
wringing
and a pin to wear.”
"...Military personnel have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution, not an allegiance to this
President-whose
own mother, of course, did not have
to endure being a "blue star" mom
for a similar
senseless war. This war is illegal, goes against
the
Constitution….a person of my background does
NOT make these
accusations lightly."
Marsha says she felt an obligation to correct
misinformation
on the site. Just four months before, her
son Chris
was part of a convoy outside Baghdad ambushed by a suicide bomber.
"I had just come home from protesting the war, in
March,"
she recalls. "When I heard that my son had
been injured, I called to
get the details."
An officer fielded the call.
"I said, 'It seems awfully ironic that I'm just coming
home
from a protest,'" she says. "And he said, 'Yes
ma'am.' I said, 'I
think it's pretty ironic, don't
you,' and he said, 'Yes ma'am, I'm
sorry I do.'"
"It was mostly cuts and abrasions," she adds. "The
others
were more injured than my son."
Two hours after her email came this anonymous
reply.
"Facts? Where are
yours?"
"Im sorry to hear you
dont support the career
choices your sons have made, it must make
them feel
good about themselves that momma doesnt [sic] give
a rats
ass about them ." Maybe you should go join
up Code Pinko at
Walter Reed Medical Center they
are there every Friday jeering our
wounded troops.
"Bush's Mother
did indeed have to endure being
a Blue Star Mother, or have you
forgotten all of
John Kerry's accusations of him ditching his service during Vietnam, which was proven false he did serve
his full time.
You do not have to wring your hands
and wear a pin to be recognized
as a Blue Star Mother,
we honor all members of the US
Military.
"Illegal war?
Congress voted overwhelming to
go to war in
Iraq. "We are not obligated to
link to any other
website other than those we feel fit to link to, don't like it start your own website...
“The Democrats in Congress speak out of both
sides
of there [sic] mouths Bush lied about WMD
yet when their man was in
charge these were there
responses."
The email listed roughly a dozen quotes from leading progressive politicians who believed Iraq had or was
pursuing weapons
of mass destruction. They indicate
Democrats believed Iraq’s weapons
program posed a
grave threat and were serious about eliminating it, but the context suggested Democrats had sought to
start a war with
equal fervor as President Bush.
Marsha
was outraged. She didn’t take lightly to being told
she didn’t give a “rat’s ass” about her son.Nor was
she amused by the falsehood that Bush had “served
his full time.” So she fired off another letter.
Dear Nameless Bush worshipper, (idolatry, according
to the bible)
I got my “facts” from places like the CIA,
allies’ newspapers, ect. [sic] You see, I will not
set my kids out like lambs to slaughter –I am far
better informed than your “talking points.” I have
no time to start my own website and little to educate
you. But I am here to tell you-“Commie Pinko”- I
am the daughter of a Marine officer and have a background
in law enforcement so for you to imply I’m even
a Democrat is a joke. I am an informed person who
knows the Constitution, Bill of Rights and the Geneva
protections...
Our troops recently trained on what to
do if
their camps are overran. Do you understand the implications of that? Our soldiers are greatly outnumbered, their
equipment is
getting broken, and replacements are
behind. Do you
understand? If you continue to support
this war, you will eventually
be standing alone.
Educate yourself-do not take my word for it.
Funny you would think my SONS
were involved.
My daughter just returned from a year in Kuwait.
My
children and other soldiers are proud of the
military but not proud
of politicians who have sent
them unprepared into a war of choice.
That is unacceptable.
My own family has spent thousands of dollars
for
equipment for my son-some of it needed JUST SO HE
COULD DO HIS
JOB IN THE WAR. I guess this is acceptable
to you. It is not to
me...
So no, I am not willing
to shove my kids out
the door and say die for this war, because I
know
what this war is really about. Did you notice there
aren’t any
WMD in Iraq? Mr. Bush takes advantage
of people’s faith and
ignorance-they, like you,
will heatedly stand up for him-right or
wrong without
examining facts or solid intelligence. He counts
on
the fact that you will take him at his word,
as obviously you have.
That is too bad; I find it
easier to live with the truth than to
attempt to
justify this war.
She included a quote from the twenty-sixth president
of the
United States, Theodore Roosevelt.
“That we are to stand by the president, right or
wrong is not
only unpatriotic and servile, but is
morally treasonable to the
American public.”
It was this missive that earned the reply"fuckoff."
Marsha's frustration is palpable. She's against the
war and is not shy about it, and it's not simply about
the effort to tie Iraq to Sept. 11. It's about Chris.
Marsha tells how her father, a former Marine, supported
the war and maintained that the troops would have
everything they needed.
"My dad said, I know they're getting everything they
need," she recounts. "I thought, okay, what can you
say? He's your father."
"Six months later, he was having to send things to
his grandson to help assist in the war effort, that
he did not have."
Marsha says her father helped pay for body armor.
Her son, Chris, is a communications specialist.
"We've sent him extra armor," she says. "He did have
new armor when he left, it was military issued, it
was not the best – there are police officers on the
street who have better armor, and I know that because
I have a degree on criminal justice. We've had to
send him tools so he can literally do his job of repairing
radios."
Beyond armor, she says she's also sent basic tools
like sockets and wrenches. She laughs as she says
it, but she's obviously pained by how little support
she's seen from those who would send her son to fight,
and perhaps to die.
"I did send him a whole ratchet set," she recalls.
"It's outrageous. We have to pay to send him things,
and of course we have to send him things all the time,
hair gel even, for instance. It costs a lot of money
to send those packages. I took three small boxes to
the post office last week and spent $40."
Chris will be deployed until October–or at least
that's how long he's supposed to serve in Iraq. I
ask her when she thinks he'll be back.
"I don't know," she says wearily. "I told him, that
I have his orders here, and he better not volunteer
to go back there."
"He needs to get home, go to classes, and stop worrying
his mother," she continues. "I can hope."
"My son is someone who is going to contribute to
this world," she adds. "He was raised with public
service in mind. This is a gross misuse of his patriotism."
Scores of naked or scantily clad people wandered the museum, lured
by an offer of free entry to "The Naked Truth," a new exhibition of
early 1900s erotic art, if they showed up wearing just a swimsuit -- or
nothing at all.
With a midsummer heat wave sweeping much of
Europe, pushing temperatures into the mid-90s Fahrenheit (mid-30s
Celsius) in Vienna, the normally staid museum decided that making the
most of its cool, climate-controlled space would be just the ticket to
spur interest in the show.
Peter Weinhaeupl, the Leopold's
commercial director, said the goal was twofold -- help people beat the
heat while creating a mini-scandal reminiscent of the way the artworks
by Gustav Klimt, Egon Schiele, Oskar Kokoschka and others shocked the
public when they first were unveiled a century ago.
"We wanted to
give people a chance to cool off, and bring nakedness into the open,"
he said. "It's a bit of an experiment. Egon Schiele was a young and
wild person in his day. He'd want to be here."
Most of those who
showed up in little or no attire Friday opted for swimsuits, but a few
hardy souls dared to bare more. Among them was Bettina Huth of
Stuttgart, Germany, who roamed the exhibition wearing only sandals and
a black bikini bottom.
Although she used a program at one point
to shield herself from a phalanx of TV cameras, Huth, 52, said she
didn't understand what all the fuss was about.
"I go into the
steam bath every week, so I'm used to being naked," she said. "I think
there's a double morality, especially in America. We lived in
California for two years, and I found it strange that my children had
to cover themselves up at the beach when they were only 3 or 4 years
old. That's ridiculous."
For years, the Austrian capital has been
known for a small but lively nudist colony on the Donauinsel, an island
in the middle of the Danube River where people disrobe, often startling
the unsuspecting joggers, cyclists and rollerbladers who happen upon
them.
Overwhelmingly Roman Catholic Austria has always been
somewhat more conservative than many other European countries. The
Viennese were scandalized when native art nouveau masters like Klimt --
best known for his sensuous "The Kiss" and the subject of an upcoming
film starring John Malkovich -- began producing works that some critics
panned as "indecency," "artistic self-pollution" and borderline
pornography.
The 180 works on display at the Leopold through Aug.
22 include Klimt's "Nude Veritas," an 1899 painting of a naked young
woman with wildflowers in her hair, and Schiele's "Two Female Friends,"
a 1915 rendition of two nude women entangled in each other's arms.
Max
Hollein, director of Frankfurt's Schirn Kunsthalle art museum, likened
the public uproar at the time to "the visible outcry at the live
transmission from last year's Super Bowl when, for a few seconds, CBS
broadcast shots of the singer Janet Jackson's exposed nipple."
Mario
Vorhemes, a 20-year-old Vienna resident who strode into the Leopold on
Friday wearing nothing but a green and black Speedo, was nonchalant.
"What's
the big deal?" he asked. "We're born naked into this world. Why can't
we walk around in it without clothes from time to time?"
Elina Ranta, a fully clothed tourist from Finland who checked out the art -- and the audience -- left amused.
"I
thought, 'This is strange. How is this possible in a museum?"' Ranta
said. "We've been in many galleries and I've never seen people walking
around like this."
"In English, my name means 'beach,"' she added. "That's pretty funny under these circumstances, isn't it?"
This passage Armando quotes is embarrassing. I mean, if I were in
charge and surrounded by sycophants, really, it would be best if their
flattery were thoughtful and did not provoke immediate laughter.
Powerline disturbs me. It's the tone, really. They're like groupies.
It
must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary
vision and brilliance approaching to genius, he can't get anyone to
notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his
time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception
that, when not bored, is hostile.
Hyperbolic? Well, maybe. But consider Bush's latest master stroke: the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate.
The pact includes the U.S., Japan, Australia, China, India and South
Korea; these six countries account for most of the world's carbon
emissions. The treaty is, in essence, a technology transfer agreement.
The U.S., Japan and Australia will share advanced pollution control
technology, and the pact's members will contribute to a fund that will
help implement the technologies. The details are still sketchy and more
countries may be admitted to the group later on. The pact's stated goal
is to cut production of "greenhouse gases" in half by the end of the
century.
What distinguishes this plan from the Kyoto protocol is that it will actually lead to a major reduction in carbon emissions! This substitution of practical impact for well-crafted verbiage stunned and infuriated European observers.
I doubt that the pact will make any difference to the earth's
climate, which will be determined, as always, by variations in the
energy emitted by the sun. But when the real cause of a phenomenon is
inaccessible, it makes people feel better to tinker with something that
they can control. Unlike Kyoto, this agreement won't devastate the U.S.
economy, and, also unlike Kyoto, the agreement will reduce carbon
emissions in the countries where they are now rising most rapidly,
India and China. Brilliant.
But I don't suppose President Bush is holding his breath, waiting for the crowd to start applauding.
Reminds me of a documentary I once saw in which they interviewed a guy
who was in a Russian gulag on the day Stalin died. He said all the
prisoners in the gulag were weeping at the announcement of the death of
the man who had sent them there -- because Stalin had made himself so
huge and important and synonymous with their country that they
literally could not imagine the world without him.
This is what the Right is trying to do -- and it scares me to death to see how close they come.
True believers (and there were plenty) said the same things about
Nixon. And, in fact, some of the same folks (e.g. Noonan) still do. But
it's important to distinguish those who rhapsodize over their chosen
demigod hypocritically, and those who are actual believers. The latter
will continue to redouble their fervor right up until the moment that
their faith evaporates, while the former never had any actual faith to
begin with, and will simply bend with the political tide.
Stated
differently, self-delusions are often clung to hardest when the
evidence supporting them is least. But once brought to the breaking
point, the delusions will evaporate, with some former believers
opportunistically joining the hypocrites (perhaps to save face as much
as any other form of self-interest) while others will flee to the
"enemy" camp. Such people do exist -- I know some of them -- and we need to be ready to welcome them.
July
28,2005 | SAN FRANCISCO -- A man who compared a woman's anatomy to a
carburetor won an annual contest that celebrates the worst writing in
the English language.
Dan
McKay, a computer analyst at Microsoft Great Plains, N.D., bested
thousands of entrants from the North Pole to Manchester, England to
triumph Wednesday in San Jose State University's annual Fiction Contest.
"As
he stared at her ample bosom, he daydreamed of the dual Stromberg
carburetors in his vintage Triumph Spitfire," he wrote, comparing a
woman's breasts to "small knurled caps of the oil dampeners."
The
competition highlights literary achievements of the most dubious sort
-- terrifyingly bad sentences that take their inspiration from minor
writer Edward George Earl Bulwer-Lytton, whose 1830 novel "Paul
Clifford" began, "It was a dark and stormy night."
"We
want writers with a little talent, but no taste," San Jose State
English Professor Scott Rice said. "And Dan's entry was just ludicrous."
McKay
was is in China and could not be reached to comment about his status as
a world-renowned wretched writer. He will receive $250.
Rice
said the challenge began as a worst paragraph contest, but judges soon
realized no one should have to wade through so much putrid prose --
such as this zinger, which took a dishonorable mention.
"The
rising sun crawled over the ridge and slithered across the hot barren
terrain into every nook and cranny like grease on a Denny's grill in
the morning rush, but only until eleven o'clock when they switch to the
lunch menu," wrote Lester Guyse, a retired fraud investigator in
Portland, Ore.
"That was the least favorite of the five I entered, but you win any way you can," Guyse said.
Ken
Aclin, of Shreveport, La., won the Grand Panjandrum's Award for his
shocking similes and abusive use of adjectives. He wrote that India
"hangs like a wet washcloth from the towel rack of Asia."
"I just saw that washcloth hanging in the shower and it looked like India," he said. "I'll be doggone."
The key section of Bush's National Security anti-terrorism manifesto discusses
the Cold War doctrine of deterrence and why it doesn't work in the age
of terrorism. The section makes three points. First, compared to the
old Soviet politburo, rogue-state leaders who sponsor terror are "more
willing to take risks, gambling with the lives of their people."
Second, whereas the Soviets saw weapons of mass destruction as a last
resort, today's rogues "see these weapons as their best means of
overcoming the conventional superiority of the United States." Third,
"deterrence will not work against a terrorist enemy whose avowed
tactics are wanton destruction and the targeting of innocents" and
"whose so-called soldiers seek martyrdom in death."
The British anti-terror policy of targeted killing which saw an
innocent Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes shot dead by
London undercover police officers who mistook him for a terrorist last
Friday, is a recipe for disaster.
Despite Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair’s assurance that
"everything is done to make it right", the use of deadly force against
one’s perceived real or imagined enemy carries the huge risk of
backfiring and accomplishing the complete opposite — making Britain
even less safe than ever.
All one has to do is look at the chaos brought about by the liberal
use of targeted killing in the Middle East by Israeli Defence Forces in
Palestine and Coalition Forces in Iraq. Largely ignoring criticisms of
its strong arm tactics when it comes to dealing with Palestinians in
general and militants specifically, Israel employs the "shoot first and
ask questions later" policy.
Todate, according to the respected B'Tselem organisation which
keeps statistics on casualties from both sides of the conflict, 187
Palestinians were assassinated under the targeted killing policy since
September 2000.
The most highly visible of these killings were the assassinations
of Hamas founder and spiritual leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin on March 22,
2004 and less than a month later his replacement Dr. Abdel Aziz Rantisi
in a missile strike on his car on Saturday, April 17, 2004.
Naturally, there are criticisms from around the world of Israeli
tactic of targeted killing. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw
condemned Israel's policy of targeted killings as "unlawful,
unjustified and counterproductive".
The reality check for Israeli, though, is the fact that suicide
attacks on civilians continues unabated — in fact, if anything, the
targeted killing appears to have inflamed the situation that has
claimed as many as 665 innocent Israeli civilians.
Much as the IDF would like to claim a higher moral ground vis-a-vis
the suicide bombers, it finds itself mired in a bloody tit-for-tat war
that it cannot win.
Meanwhile, employing targeted killing, Coalition Forces have
desperately attempted to push back Iraqi insurgents. Trigger-happy
Americans troops are quick to let out a round of automatic fire into
anything that moves that is not in a fortified Humvee.
Last month, for instance, Ahmad Wail Bakri, director for
Al-Sharqiya television, was reportedly trying to pass a traffic
accident in the Sayyidiyya district when US troops opened fire at his
car, killing him on the spot.
In March, Italian secret agent Nicola Calipari was killed while on
his way to Baghdad Airport after securing the release of Italian
journalist Giuliana Sgrena. The Americans claimed, and the Italians
disputed, that the car carrying Mr. Calipari did not stop even after
warning shots were fired.
Regardless of what really happened, Mr. Calipari was one of the
lucky ones in that his death made the news and the Americans were
forced to "look into the circumstances leading to his death".
Unfortunately, according to Iraq Body Count, thousands of Iraqis
have perished, not because of misdirected fire, but as a direct result
of US policy that targets the wrong person. And although the US loathes
to admit it, the targeting of anyone suspected of links to Iraqi
insurgency has made the job of the real insurgents very easy — not only
are civilians now reluctant to provide valuable intelligence to the
Coalition Forces, it is apparent that so-called fence-sitters are now
firmly taking the side of the insurgents.
In Britain where the Muslim community is in shock like everyone
else over the home-grown terror, there is united effort to help police
investigation of the terrorists.
Muslim leaders have openly condemned the attacks and have supported
initiatives to make the city safer. This, however, will change very
rapidly if another innocent person, a Muslim, is killed by London
Police.
The accumulated goodwill from the community will dry up like
morning dew, and in its place will grow hardened resentment that is
easily exploited by extremists.
True enough, in war, there is what former US Secretary of Defence
Robert McNamara called the fog of war -- a situation of confusion where
you hit innocent bystanders or take out the wrong neighbourhood.
Today it is known as collateral damage which is usually chalked up as the cost of doing the business called war.
However, targeted killing is a deliberate decision to shoot to kill
because of perceived threat that may or may not exist.
The person who pulls the trigger is the judge, jury and executioner.
What happened last Friday in Britain was therefore a targeted
killing where officers were acting under orders to take out a suspected
terrorist regardless of the possibility that the person could be
innocent -- which is what it turned out to be. Mr. de Menezes never
really knew what hit him, five bullets were pumped into his head at
close range.
His death and the insistence by London Police that sometimes the
innocents may have to die reinforces the obnoxious view expressed by US
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld who said in April 2003 after the
fall of Baghdad that, "Freedom's untidy."
Free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad
things”.
One would prefer what Mr. Rumsfeld said in the next sentence
“They’re also free to live their lives and do wonderful things”. Mr.
Menezes was not given that chance.
According to the document, "History will judge harshly those who saw
this coming danger but failed to act. In the new world we have entered,
the only path to safety is the path of action." But this is a
backward-looking policy disguised as a forward-looking policy. It
focuses on what history has already judged harshly. Bush is afraid that
if we don't err on the side of shooting first and asking questions
later, what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, will happen again.
That
isn't the new world we're entering. The new world is the one
rationalized by Bush's manifesto: a world in which great powers wink at
each other's misconduct, every threat is imminent, self-defense means
pre-emptive action abroad, interests are dressed up as values, and
cooperation means cooperating with the United States. We don't know
what history will judge harshly about this era, but there's a good
chance it'll be the compromises we embraced to rectify the mistakes of
Sept. 11. Perhaps those compromises are necessary. Covering them up
surely isn't.
The words appear
slowly, against the familiar powder-blue shape of the bird in flight --
the Dove soap symbol -- like soothing, watery poetry:
For too long beauty has been defined by narrow, stifling sterotypes [sic]. You've told us it's time to change all that. We agree. Because we believe real beauty comes In many shapes, sizes and ages. It is why we started the Campaign for Real Beauty. And why we hope you'll take part.
This is the lilting intro to the Web site
that Dove has dedicated to its "Real Beauty" advertising campaign, for
which it has picked six women who are not professional models -- each
beautiful, but broader than Bundchen, heftier than an Olsen twin -- to
model in bras and panties.
The campaign is
massive; these six broads are currently featured in national television
and magazine ads, as well as on billboards and the sides of buses in
urban markets like Boston, Chicago, Washington, Dallas, Los Angeles,
Miami, New York and San Francisco. And they've made quite an impact.
Apparently, this public display of non-liposuctioned thighs is so
jaw-droppingly revelatory that recent weeks have seen the Real Beauty
models booked on everything from "The Today Show" to "The View" to CNN.
All the hoopla is precisely what Dove expected. According to a
press release, Dove wants "to make women feel more beautiful every day
by challenging today's stereotypical view of beauty and inspiring women
to take great care of themselves." The use of "real women" (don't think
too hard about the Kate Mosses of the world losing their status as
biological females here) "of various ages, shapes and sizes" is
designed "to provoke discussion and debate about today's typecast
beauty images."
It's a great idea --- a worthy follow-up to Dove's 2004 campaign,
which featured women with lined faces, silver hair and heavy freckles,
and asked questions like, "Wrinkled? Or Wonderful?" and also got a lot
of attention, including a shout-out on the "Ellen DeGeneres Show."
As Stacy Nadeau, one of the Real Beauty models and a full-time student from Ann Arbor, Mich., says
on the campaign Web site, "I have always been a curvier girl and always
will be. I am proud of my body and think all women should be proud of
theirs too. This is my time to encourage and help women feel great
about themselves, no matter what they weigh or look like. Women have
surrendered to diets and insane eating habits to live up to social
stereotypes for too long. It's time that all women felt beautiful in
their own skin."
But let's hope that skin doesn't have any cellulite. Because no one wants to look at a cottage-cheesy ass.
That's right. The
one little wrinkle -- so to speak -- in this you-go-grrl
stick-it-to-the-media-man empowerment campaign is that the set of Dove
products that these real women are shilling for is cellulite firming cream.
Specifically, Dove's new "Intensive Firming Cream," described as "a
highly effective blend of glycerin, plus seaweed extract and elastin
peptides known for their skin-firming properties." It's supposed to "go
to work on problem areas to help skin feel firmer and reduce the
appearance of cellulite in two weeks." There are also the Intensive
Firming Lotion and the Firming Moisturizing Body Wash, which do pretty
much the same thing.
But as long as
you're patting yourself on the back for hiring real-life models with
imperfect bodies, thereby "challenging today's stereotypical view of
beauty and inspiring women to take great care of themselves," why ask
those models to flog a cream that has zero health value and is just an
expensive and temporary Band-Aid for a "problem" that the media has
told us we have with our bodies. Incidentally, cellulite isn't even a
result of being overweight!
It's the result of cellular changes in the skin. Skinny people have
cellulite. Old people have cellulite. Young people have cellulite. Gwyneth Paltrow has cellulite. All God's children have cellulite.
Why not run an ad that proclaims, "Cellulite: Uniquely MINE!"
Or, more realistically, why aren't these women selling shampoo? Or soap? Or moisturizer?
It's a great
gimmick -- one that few of us can take issue with. But just like Dove's
"love your ass but not the fat on it" campaign, much of this stuff
prompts grim questions about whether it's even possible to break the
feel-bad cycle of the beauty industry. Blanchett, after all, recently
signed on as spokeswoman for SK-II line of cosmetics. And while it's
all well and good to tell 8-year-old girls that real beauty is about
trust, it's sort of funny to think about doing it while selling them
minty lip shine or fruit-scented "My Way Styling Gel" for eight bucks a
pop.
Let them be. After
all, they have decades ahead of them in which to worry about
eradicating the cellulite from their really beautiful curves.
Below is a Bloomberg article which is reporting that Karl Rove,
senior adviser to the President and deputy chief of staff, and Lewis
Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, are being investigated
for having lied to a federal grand jury about how they learned the
identity of a covert CIA agent, Valerie Plame (Murray Waas at the
American Prospect wrote a similar story yesterday).
Rove, Libby Accounts in CIA Case Differ With Those of Reporters
By Richard Keil
July 22 (Bloomberg) Two top White House aides have given accounts to
the special prosecutor about how reporters told them the identity of a
CIA agent that are at odds with what the reporters have said, according
to persons familiar with the case.
Lewis "Scooter" Libby,
Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, told special prosecutor
Patrick Fitzgerald that he first learned from NBC News reporter Tim
Russert of the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame, the wife of former
ambassador and Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson. Russert has
testified before a federal grand jury that he didn't tell Libby of
Plame's identity.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove
told Fitzgerald that he first learned the identity of the CIA agent
from syndicated columnist Robert Novak, who was first to report Plame's
name and connection to Wilson. Novak, according to a source familiar
with the matter, has given a somewhat different version to the special
prosecutor.
These discrepancies
may be important because one issue Fitzgerald is investigating is
whether Libby, Rove, or other administration officials made false
statements during the course of the investigation. The Plame case has
its genesis in whether any administration officials violated a 1982 law
making it illegal to knowingly reveal the name of a CIA agent.
The
CIA requested the inquiry after Novak's July 14, 2003, article that
said Plame recommended her husband for a 2002 mission to check into
reports Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger. Wilson, in a July 6
column in the New York Times, said the Bush administration "twisted"
some of the intelligence on Iraq's weapons to justify the war.
Robert
Luskin, Rove's attorney, said today that Rove did tell the grand jury
"he had not heard her name before he heard it from Bob Novak." He
declined in an interview to comment on whether Novak's account of their
conversation differed from Rove's.
There also is a discrepancy
between accounts given by Rove and Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper.
The White House aide mentioned Wilson's wife " though not by name" in
a July 11, 2003 conversation with Cooper. Rove says that Cooper called
him to talk about welfare reform and the Wilson connection was
mentioned later in passing.
Cooper wrote in Time magazine last
week that he told the grand jury that he never discussed welfare reform
with Rove in that call.
The leak case shows that
administration officials have in effect been using reporters as shields
by claiming that the information on Plame first came from them.
One
reporter, Judith Miller of the New York Times, has been jailed on
contempt of court charges for refusing to testify before the grand jury
about her reporting on the Plame case.
Cooper testified only
after Time Inc. said it would comply with Fitzgerald's demands for
Cooper's notes and reporting on the Plame matter, particularly
regarding his dealings with Rove.
Libby didn't return a phone call seeking comment.
The
various accounts of conversations between Rove, Libby and reporters
come as new details emerge about a classified State Department
memorandum that's also at the center of Fitzgerald's probe.
A
memo by the department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR)
included Plame's name in a paragraph marked "(S)" for "Secret," a
designation that should have indicated to anyone who read it that the
information was classified, the Washington Post reported yesterday.
The
memo, prepared July 7, 2003, for Secretary of State Colin Powell, is a
focus of Fitzgerald's interest, according to individuals who have
testified before the grand jury and attorneys familiar with the case.
The
three-page document said that Wilson had been recommended for a
CIA-sponsored trip to Africa by his wife, Valerie Wilson, who worked on
the CIA's counter-proliferations desk.
In his New York Times
article, Wilson said there was no basis to conclude that Iraq was
trying to buy nuclear material in Africa and that the administration
had exaggerated the evidence.
Bush had said in his State of the Union message in January, 2003 that Iraq was trying to purchase nuclear materials in Africa.
The
memo summarizing the Plame-Wilson connection was provided to Powell as
he left with President George W. Bush on a five-day trip to Africa.
Fitzgerald is exploring whether other White House officials who
accompanied Bush may have gained access to the memo and shared its
contents with officials back in Washington. Rove and Libby didn't
accompany Bush to Africa.
One key to the inquiry is when White
House aides knew of Wilson's connection to Plame and whether they
learned about it through this memo or other classified information.
Some
Bush allies were hopeful that the Fitzgerald investigation, which
dominated the news in Washington for the first part of July, would
subside as the focus now is on Bush's nomination of Judge John Roberts
to fill the first vacancy on the Supreme Court in 11 years.
Yet special prosecutor Fitzgerald, not media coverage, will determine the outcome of this investigation.
It appears to me the more spin we hear from the White house, the more
stories come out totally refuting the spin doctoring, this
administration has been coasting too long with their veils of secrecy
and villifying anyone who questions their policies so it is about time
that they have finally got caught hopefully it will steamroll as watergate did, because this country is
becoming dangerously divided and our president and his band of
merrymakers is to blame!
New York City Subways About to Lose Valuable Pot Dealer Fares
We must invade your privacy for the sake of your
security. Don't you see? We can only maintain your freedom by taking it
away from you and putting it in this box over here. You can come visit.
The New York Times reports that New York City police officers will begin random searches of passengers' bags, supposedly as a security measure after the London bombings. And when
they start arresting people for misdeamenor contraband items, I'm sure
that people are going to feel real fucking safe. Safe as in not taking
the subway if they're going to get searched safe.
Random searches are totally unacceptable. If these searches are
truly random, they are unlikely to detect, much less deter, suicide
bombers. How many million riders are there on the MTA on any given
weekday? How many transit cops would have to be diverted from more
pressing duties to search the bags of random subway riders? What
happens when we remember that many suicide bombers strap explosives to
their bodies? Maybe the next step will be random frisks or even random
strip searches.
Do we really think that these searches will be random? Mayor
Bloomberg insists that the police will make every effort to avoid
racial profiling. What will the subway cops actually do? Random searches will be very
unlikely to catch or deter anybody, as others have said. The police
know this. They also know that profile based searches are politically
unacceptable. So, the subway-riding public gets the worst of both
worlds: The police will do profile based searches. The police will also
do "affirmative action" searches so as to "equalize" adverse treatment.
"The police can and should be aggressively
investigating anyone they suspect is trying to bring explosives into
the subway," said Christopher Dunn, associate legal director at the New
York Civil Liberties Union. "However, random police searches of people
without any suspicion of wrongdoing are contrary to our most basic
constitutional values. This is a very troubling announcement."
This is not a serious counter-terrorism effort. This is a public
relations move by Mayor Bloomberg and the MTA. They want to convince
the public that they're doing something to prevent terrorism on the
subways. Random searches are much more telegenic than long term plans
to safeguard the subway's underwater tunnels.It might also be a good idea to increase the number of K-9 officers
and explosive-sniffing dogs, but that would cost money.
Bruce Schneier refers to this sort of thing as "security theater." It'd
be funny if it wasn't such an obvious invasion of privacy. Schneier's
newsletter is a must-read for anyone interested in security issues and
public policy. No bullshit, thoughtful, well reasoned, and to the
point. link : http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram.html
Orgasm is literally a mind-blowing experience for a woman, scientists revealed on Monday.
Much of her brain shuts down when she reaches a sexual climax, including areas that deal with emotion.
The
discovery was made during a bizarre set of experiments in the
Netherlands in which couples were asked to stimulate each other while
undergoing brain scans.
It seems to explode the myth that while men switch off during sex, the part of women that is most turned on is in their heads.
By looking at the brain scans, researchers had no trouble telling when women were "faking it".
The
brains of volunteers who were asked to simulate orgasm after a period
of stimulation remained fully active and in conscious control.
Neuroscientist
Dr Gert Holstege, from the University of Groningen, who led the
research, said: "The main thing we saw in females is deactivation of
the brain, which was unbelievable; really very pronounced.
"I
think that's the major outcome of the study. What you see is
deactivation of large parts of the brain, especially the emotional
brain, the fear centres."
The only part of a woman's brain that
was activated during orgasm was the cerebellum. Although chiefly
associated with the control of movement, scientists think it may also
play an emotional role.
The cerebellum was also active during fake orgasms, but elsewhere the picture was very different.
"If
you look at the women who faked orgasm, we see the same kind of thing
in the cerebellum taking place, but the cortex, the conscious part of
the brain, is also active," said Dr Holstege.
"Women can imitate orgasm quite well, but in the brain it's not the same."
Even
the body movements made during a real orgasm were unconscious and did
not involve the "thinking" part of the brain, hesaid. This was not the
case with a fake orgasm.
Shutting down the brain during orgasm ensured that obstacles such as fear and stress did not get in the way.
"Deactivation
of these very important parts of the brain might be the most important
necessity for having an orgasm," said Dr Holstege.
"When you are
fearful or have a very high level of anxiety, then it's hard to have
sex because during sex you really have to give yourself and let go."
Men
were studied in the same way. But because the male orgasm during
ejaculation takes such a short time - typically 20 seconds - it was
difficult to obtain meaningful brain scan data.
The scans showed
a similar activation of the cerebellum in men. Dr Holstege suspected
other parts of men's brains mirrored those of women and became
deactivated during orgasm.
However, another part of the study in
which couples stimulated each other for two minutes without reaching
orgasm showed distinct differences between men and women.
In
both, a "fear centre" called the amygdala was deactivated. But in men
alone, the scientists saw activation of an ancient, primitive part of
the brain linked to emotion called the insula.
There was also a
difference in the way touching the genitals affected the somatosensory
cortex of the brain. Women merely experienced a sensory feeling,
whereas in men emotions were involved.
"Men are seeing it as a
big deal, the interpretation of what is happening is important to
them," said Dr Holstege. "Women apparently do not have this idea that,
OK, this is so important. With women the primary feeling is there, but
not the interpretation."
Another odd observation was that the
hippocampus, which deals with memory, was deactivated in women. The
researchers have no idea why.
A total of 13 women and 11 men, ranging in age from 19 to 49, took part in the experiments at Dr Holstege's laboratory.
Presenting
the findings today at the annual meeting of the European Society of
Human Reproduction and Embryology in Copenhagen, Denmark, he admitted
it was a not the easiest of studies to carry out.
The volunteers, all partners, were recruited through advertisements placed in Dutch magazines.
To
put participants in the right mood, members of Dr Holstege's team spoke
reassuringly to them, and dimmed the lighting in the scanning room.
Since
it was vital to remain completely still in the scanner, volunteers had
to have their heads restrained while being sexually stimulated. The
rest of the body was free to move.
"We are neuroscientists, so we're only interested in the brain," said Dr Holstege.
The
men and women, who were all heterosexual and right-handed, stimulated
each others' genitals, but did not have full intercourse.
Participants
lay naked on a table with their head inside the scanner. Dr Holstege
said a major problem was that they got cold feet - literally. A
solution was found in the form of socks supplied by the scientists.
Dr Holstege added that the research could in future lead to better treatments for sexual dysfunction.
The key appeared to be to reduce fear and anxiety - as was illustrated by the aphrodisiac effect on alcohol.
"Alcohol brings down the fear level," said Dr Holstege. "Everyone knows if you give alcohol to a woman it makes things easier."
Marsha
Walker's son survived a suicide bomb in Iraq.
Scores of naked or scantily clad people wandered the museum, lured
by an offer of free entry to "The Naked Truth," a new exhibition of
early 1900s erotic art, if they showed up wearing just a swimsuit -- or
nothing at all.
The key section of Bush's National Security anti-terrorism manifesto 
For too long 
Below is a Bloomberg article which is reporting that Karl Rove,
senior adviser to the President and deputy chief of staff, and Lewis
Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, are being investigated
for having lied to a federal grand jury about how they learned the
identity of a covert CIA agent, Valerie Plame (Murray Waas at the
American Prospect wrote a 
