Random Musings from a Muse: Abuse of Authority

Showing posts with label Abuse of Authority. Show all posts

Saturday, December 31, 2016

Dagger of the Mind

Scapegoat/Boogeyman

Dagger of the Mind,

or,

"The Only Thing We Have to Fear

Is Fear Itself,"

by Liviana

His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.

~ A Psychological Analysis of Adolph Hitler: His Life and Legend,
by Walter C. Langer,
Office of Strategic Services, Washington, D.C., 1943/1944
(emphasis added)

For some months now, the American people have been subjected to insinuations, implications, speculations, and even blatantly explicit declarations that Russia somehow "interfered" with the just-past election, most often involving claims of alleged "hacking" on the part of the Russian government or its assets or agents, sometimes accusing other Americans, especially those who run or work for independent media outlets, of having acted willfully or unwittingly as agents of this scheme. Despite no evidence being provided in support of this narrative, certain venues of the main stream media have repeated these speculations, insinuations, and explicit allegations ad nauseam. Worth remembering in considering these tales and whispers is the history of how a mere six corporations came to dominate most of American media. Also extremely worthy of note is the history as well as the current connections of The Washington Post, which has been one of the main media outlets pushing this narrative.

The narrative in question began following publication, by WikiLeaks, of various emails of the Democratic National Committee (nobody seems to be even trying to pretend anymore that these emails are not authentic, so let's admit that they are in fact the genuine article), which exposed widespread corruption in the form of the DNC colluding with the Hillary Clinton for President campaign to promote said campaign and attempt to undermine the campaign of Bernie Sanders for the same office, a fact which many of Senator Sanders' supporters already suspected. Whether the narrative originated with the Hillary campaign or the DNC, it was a transparent attempt at diversion and misdirection. As the revelations continued, the main stream media was also implicated. One of the main media outlets promoting Mrs Clinton's candidacy was, again, The Washington Post, but it was by no means acting alone in this. The narrative was spread in an effort to shift attention from the content of the emails to the alleged theft of the emails by agents or assets of the Russian government's intelligence services, and possibly with the intention of frightening or enraging the American people so that the plans of certain geopolitical interests could be actualized, since such actualization would require activities with a great probability of provoking Russia's government and could lead to war with Russian forces.

To say that Russia alone was being scapegoated for the abysmal candidacy and pathetic strategies of the Hillary Clinton for President 2016 campaign, the corruption of the DNC, and the cooperation of much of the corporate media, however, would be to present only a part of the picture. Indeed, Senator Sanders himself, his supporters, Doctor Jill Stein, third party voters, Director James Comey of the FBI, the spectres of racism and sexism, and assorted other persons, groups, and ideas, were all subjects of the attempt to shift blame away from Hillary herself, her campaign, the DNC, the corporate media, and the Democratic Party establishment. Once the general election was over, though, the focus was quickly narrowed to "the Russian government." The Office of the Director of National Intelligence got involved in promoting the narrative. The FBI stated there was no evidence in support of this narrative. The Geheim Staats ... um ... the Department of Homeland Security got involved in promoting the narrative. CIA intel veterans scoffed. The CIA itself got involved in promoting the narrative. President Obama pushed the narrative. Even with the alphabet soup and the President joining in, however, only roughly half of Hillary's supporters were willing to buy into the narrative, far fewer of President-elect Trump's supporters thought it possible, and (although no data is available for the views of third party voters on the narrative) most Green Party US members and supporters of my acquaintance seem to me to be unimpressed with the narrative. Tied up in this mess is also a lot of hysteria over "Russian propaganda" and "fake news," which has prompted the critters in Congress, always eager to engage in kneejerk overreactions to hysteria, to pass a couple of laws which are, like the U.S.A.P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act before them, attacks upon the Constitutional Rights of American citizens. This is where we are on the final day of the year 2016.

I have been keeping up with this as it unfolded, and have collected a number of sources which cast significant doubt on the narrative that "the Russians" engaged in any "hacking" or other "interference" in the just-past election cycle. I present them here for the consideration of the American people, in the interests of our Republic and with the hope that the people will come to the correct conclusion and demand that our government avoid the utter insanity which war between the USA and the Russian Federation would be, regardless of what some billionaires and their stooges might like. Note that, rather than embed the videos as I generally do, I will be giving video sources as hyperlinks; I made this choice to keep the presentation looking cleaner and more organized, because I wanted to present these sources in a chronological order (due to other responsibilities, I have not completely accomplished this, but only a few are out of place in the desired order).

DNC Hacker Denies Russian Link, Says Attack Was His ‘Personal Project' | Motherboard
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/dnc-hacker-guccifer-20-denies-russian-link-says-attack-was-his-personal-project

Against Neo-McCarthyism | The Nation
https://www.thenation.com/article/against-neo-mccarthyism/

Democrats’ Tactic of Accusing Critics of Kremlin Allegiance Has Long, Ugly History in U.S. | The Intercept
https://theintercept.com/2016/08/08/dems-tactic-of-accusing-adversaries-of-kremlin-ties-and-russia-sympathies-has-long-history-in-us/

A New McCarthyism: Greenwald on Clinton Camp’s Attempts to Link Trump, Stein & WikiLeaks to Russia | Democracy Now! - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yy742HAovY

Follow the Money Trail For Source of 'Russian Threat' Paranoia | Russia Insider
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/follow-money-trail-source-russian-threat-paranoia/ri16086

Getting Fooled on Iraq, Libya, Now Russia | Common Dreams
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/09/15/getting-fooled-iraq-libya-now-russia

Corporate Media & Democrats Play Russia FEAR Card; Hide Hillary Clinton's Russian Record | Sane Progressive - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbBxrUJSItw

Russia responds to U.S. hacking allegations | CBS News
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-responds-to-us-hacking-allegations/

Background and Documents on Attempts to Frame Assange as a Pedophile and Russian spy | WikiLeaks
https://wikileaks.org/Background-and-Documents-on-Attempts-to-Frame-Assange-as-a-Pedophile-and.html

Jordan's NOT HAVING Donna Brazile's Russia Dodge! | TYT Politics - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-JChl8w6oQ

Media Ignores Clinton's Wikileaks Emails, Focuses On Russian Hacks | The Young Turks - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeEDHjxOK6g

Clinton Confirms That WikiLeaks Podesta Emails Are True, Still Blames Russia | Inquisitr
http://www.inquisitr.com/3614870/clinton-confirms-that-wikileaks-podesta-emails-are-true-still-blames-russia/

The "Fact" That 17 Intelligence Agencies Confirmed Russia is Behind the Email Hacks Isn’t Actually…A "Fact" | Zero Hedge
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-20/fact-17-intelligence-agencies-confirmed-russia-behind-email-hacks-isn%E2%80%99t-actually%E2%80%A6a-f

NSA Whistleblower: US Intelligence Worker Likely Behind DNC Leaks, Not Russia | Zero Hedge
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-22/nsa-whistleblower-us-intelligence-worker-likely-behind-dnc-leaks-not-russia

John Podesta Wasn't Hacked by Russians—He Fell For a Phishing Scam | The Humanist Report - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0oFRqnBhfQ

Despite Clinton Conspiracy Theories, FBI Finds No Clear Link Between Trump And Russia | Liberal Values
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/2016/11/01/despite-clinton-conspiracy-theories-fbi-finds-no-clear-link-between-trump-and-russia/

Here’s the Problem With the Story Connecting Russia to Donald Trump’s Email Server | The Intercept
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/01/heres-the-problem-with-the-story-connecting-russia-to-donald-trumps-email-server/

If You Question the Establishment You Are Guilty of Espionage, Says Corporate Media -- Because Russia | The Free Thought Project
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/establishment-guilty-espionage-russian/

Mainstream Media Recap: Who Colluded With the Clinton Campaign? | Observer
http://observer.com/2016/11/mainstream-media-recap-who-colluded-with-the-clinton-campaign/

Washington Post Disgracefully Promotes a McCarthyite Blacklist From a New, Hidden, and Very Shady Group | The Intercept
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/26/washington-post-disgracefully-promotes-a-mccarthyite-blacklist-from-a-new-hidden-and-very-shady-group/

Russian Agents Are Not Behind Every Piece of Fake News You See | Fortune
http://fortune.com/2016/11/25/russian-fake-news/

'Washington Post' 'Blacklist' Story Is Shameful, Disgusting | Matt Taibbi - Rolling Stone
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/washington-post-blacklist-story-is-shameful-disgusting-w452543

The CIA and the Press: When the Washington Post Ran the CIA’s Propaganda Network | CounterPunch
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/30/the-cia-and-the-press-when-the-washington-post-ran-the-cias-propaganda-network/

The Propaganda About Russian Propaganda | The New Yorker
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-propaganda-about-russian-propaganda

CounterPunch as Russian Propagandists: the Washington Post’s Shallow Smear | CounterPunch
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/12/02/counterpunch-as-russian-propagandists-the-washington-posts-shallow-smear/

Neo-McCarthyism and the New Cold War | The Nation
https://www.thenation.com/article/neo-mccarthyism-and-the-new-cold-war/

When the jig is up, the mainstream media blames Russia | The Digital Firehose
http://thedigitalfirehose.blogspot.com/2016/12/when-jig-is-up-mainstream-media-blames.html

Washington Post Appends Editor's Note to Russian Propaganda Story | Washingtonian
https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/12/07/washington-post-appends-editors-note-russian-propaganda-story/

A New Wave Of Anti-Russia Hysteria Based Upon Questionable Information | Liberal Values
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/2016/12/10/a-new-wave-of-anti-russia-hysteria-based-upon-questionable-information/

Anonymous Leaks to the WashPost About the CIA’s Russia Beliefs Are No Substitute for Evidence | The Intercept
https://theintercept.com/2016/12/10/anonymous-leaks-to-the-washpost-about-the-cias-russia-beliefs-are-no-substitute-for-evidence/

Here’s the Public Evidence Russia Hacked the DNC — It’s Not Enough | The Intercept
https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidence-russia-hacked-the-dnc-its-not-enough/

CIA Intelligence Vets Dispute Russia Hack Claims, Look at the Wider Picture | Sane Progressive - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh0EAj9UUIY

Corporate Democrats Stir Up War Fever Against Russia to Turn Election | Black Agenda Report
http://blackagendareport.com/dems_stir_war_to_turn_election

Hillary Clinton Using "Fake News" as Excuse to Wage War on 1st Amendment | The Humanist Report - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vh4JbZktGnY

Supposedly “Objective Reporters” Not So “Objective” When It Comes To The Scary Russian Menace | mtracey – Medium
https://medium.com/mtracey/supposedly-objective-reporters-not-so-objective-when-it-comes-to-the-scary-russian-menace-1c039d330196#.gur09xqw8

WikiLeaks Got Clinton Emails From Disgusted Insiders, Not Russia | The Jimmy Dore Show - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JafSyi4ZZ7w

WikiLeaks: Seth Rich Leaked Clinton Emails, Not Russia | BuzzfeedUSA
http://buzzfeedusa.com/wikileaks-seth-rich-leaked-clinton-emails-not-russia/

WikiLeaks operative claims Russia did NOT provide Hillary Clinton emails | Daily Mail Online
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

Under Amazon’s CIA Cloud: The Washington Post | Common Dreams
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2013/12/18/under-amazons-cia-cloud-washington-post

Glenn Greenwald Sets The Record Straight On The CIA & Russian Hacking | Secular Talk - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DE4TD2xugqA

Obama Signs Ministry of Truth Into Law Two Days Before Christmas | Sane Progressive - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8K29tGuUpk

WikiLeaks ✔@wikileaks Obama's Russia sanctions: Comment & Link | Giovanna X - Google+
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+GiovannaX/posts/g4cYCFSkPqD

What Assange Actually Said:
Julian Assange: "Donald? It's a change anyway" | Repubblica.it
http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2016/12/23/news/assange_wikileaks-154754000/

What The Russian Hacking Report DOESN'T Say | Washington's Blog
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/12/russian-hacking-doesnt-say.html

Obama Sanctions Against Russia About War & Geopolitics NOT US Elections | Sane Progressive - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRuFuueLi8s

The American Public Should Be Thankful For Russian “Interference” | mtracey — Medium
https://medium.com/mtracey/the-american-public-should-be-thankful-for-russian-interference-6f2a4cc8d0ab#.84rg3l15w

Something About This Russia Story Stinks | Matt Taibbi - Rolling Stone
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/something-about-this-russia-story-stinks-w458439

The Demand For Proof Of Russian Hacking Completely Misses The Point | Caitlin Johnstone - Newslogue Debate
http://www.newslogue.com/debate/244/CaitlinJohnstone

White House fails to make case that Russian hackers tampered with election | Ars Technica
http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/12/did-russia-tamper-with-the-2016-election-bitter-debate-likely-to-rage-on/

Exhibit A: Narcissist, Megalomaniac, Pathological Liar, or Just Plain Batshit Crazy Warmonger? Hillary Clinton, ladies and gentlemen.
Hillary Clinton Calls Out Vladimir Putin in Most Hypocritical Rant Ever | The Humanist Report - YouTube
https://youtu.be/BCutIKaa2oQ

Corporate Media Draws Opposite Conclusion from CIA Vets on Leaked Russia Document | Sane Progressive - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwlJHzOjRtE

Russia Hysteria Infects WashPost Again: False Story About Hacking U.S. Electric Grid | The Intercept
https://theintercept.com/2016/12/31/russia-hysteria-infects-washpost-again-false-story-about-hacking-u-s-electric-grid/

No, Russia Did Not Hack Grid. Republican/Democrats Reveal the GAME with Latest Lie | Sane Progressive - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9zwJO5DFy0

2016: How Truth was Destroyed So You'd Buy the Government's Propaganda | The Free Thought Project
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/information-destroyed-truth-propaganda/#LDB1IZ92sLRYV8sb.99

US Govt Data Shows Russia Used Outdated Ukrainian PHP Malware | WordFence
https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/
From the article just linked:

Overall Conclusion

The IP addresses that DHS provided may have been used for an attack by a state actor like Russia. But they don’t appear to provide any association with Russia. They are probably used by a wide range of other malicious actors, especially the 15% of IP addresses that are Tor exit nodes.

The malware sample is old, widely used and appears to be Ukrainian. It has no apparent relationship with Russian intelligence and it would be an indicator of compromise for any website.

Fear is the mind-killer.

~ Frank Herbert

Believe what you want, but please investigate with critical thinking skills first, and without allowing incompetent twits and lying jackasses to terrorize you into swallowing claims which are, at best, dubious. War between the US and Russia would be devastation on a massive scale, and the goal of this would be, yet again, more profits for the already insanely and obscenely wealthy petroleum industry. Follow the money from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and you'll know who's behind this current narrative and why (if you aren't already familiar with the players in the CNAS and their paper linked above, and haven't already read the Project for the New American Century's paper, "Rebuilding America's Defenses" ...).

I will continue to update these resources until shortly after Donald Trump has been inaugurated as President, after which time, the efforts of the establishment Democrats and their pals in the USIC to spin this "Russian interference in the election" narrative will become largely irrelevant. And again, for anyone who still doesn't get it: I'm not a supporter of Donald Trump (but do not mistake that disclaimer for any indication of support for Hillary Clinton; I am a member of the Green Party of the United States, and I voted for Doctor Jill Stein, who was the only person in the race worthy of the office after July of 2016), but more than enough TRUE things about him exist to criticize without having to make up unbelievable fairy tales.

The title of the post comes from Star Trek (The Original Series), Season 1, episode 9; episode 9 overall; production code 11.

Fair use notice
This blog contains copyrighted material the use of which may not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my effort to advance understanding of scientific, environmental, political, human rights, economic, philosophical, psychological, cultural, and social issues, etc.
I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. No challenge of ownership is intended or implied.
For more information: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Copyright notice
All original content in this blog is © Copyright 2013-2017 & an. seqq. by "Liviana" (Giovanna L.).

Saturday, February 21, 2015

Some Musings Regarding LGBTI Discrimination

Some Musings Regarding LGBTI Discrimination

Directed to Proponents of Discrimination on the Alleged Grounds of "Religious Freedom"

by Liviana (Giovanna L.)

In the article, "Kansas Guv Endangers Thousands of Gays," V. Gene Robinson writes:

It is an astounding and horrifying phenomenon when rights are actually taken away from citizens. It is the overwhelming tradition in our democracy for laws, acts of Congress, and the Constitution itself to give and protect its citizens’ rights, not take them away.

I keep affirming this idea just as Robinson has done. The Constitution should never be amended to restrict rights, but only to extend them. America is about Freedom as preferable to Control -- especially preferable to Control by some religious sect.

If I didn't know better, I would be tempted to argue for establishing a Senate Unamerican Activities Committee which could try unamerican twats like Bareback ... uh, Brownback ... on trial for disloyalty to the ideals of Americanism. But such committees, like Puritans and Pilgrims in New England, tend to go on witch hunts, imagining that the bogeyman is behind every tree and under every rock, and a lot of cute and furry animals get hurt in the process. (Try not to get lost in my extended metaphors. It might hurt your brain if you can't find the key to get back to literal and figurative prose. Then again, too many people seem to have lost the key to get into the figurative and metaphoric expressions and are stuck in literality, with serious psychological dysfunction being the rather obvious result.)

But this guy doesn't need to be entrusted with any authority over any citizen or group of citizens. He's a crackpot, to put it mildly.

What I find most astonishing in all of this hoopla from the Sanhedrin of the present is the notion that discrimination is acceptable. Woe unto you, busybodies and self-righteous ones, for you neither enter in nor suffer others to enter in. Woe unto you, for you swallow camels in your credulity, but cannot let go of a turd that is of little or no importance to you, due to your anal retentiveness and compulsion to mind everyone's business but your own. I can understand the desire you have not to look into the mirror -- the reflection must be akin to the picture of Dorian Gray. You will eventually look at the reflection; the act is unavoidable. Best to do so consciously, willingly, and for an extended period.

I am going to repeat myself, though it annoy me to have to continue to do so on so many different matters in which the obvious ought to be obvious to all without having to be pointed out even once. As such, I will add more details and allusions, for variety is the spice of life.

A limited number of Christian sects (or, as they prefer to call them, "denominations") teach that there are seven sacraments. More sects teach that there are two. Only those sects which teach the existence of seven sacraments hold to a view that one of the sacraments is what they term "Holy Matrimony." The majority of Christian sects, including the Southern Baptist Convention (so very vocal in the fight against liberty, justice, and equality for all), teach that the only sacraments are Baptism and the Eucharistic ceremony. In fact, one Protestant sect which still does affirm that "Holy Matrimony" is a sacrament is the Church of England, which came into being in part as a result of an English monarch deciding that his marriage was not such a big thing after all since the wife had produced no heir for him. In spite of how the Anglican sect came into being, and in spite of the fact of most Christian sects not even teaching the doctrine that Holy Matrimony is a sacrament, a far more relevant prey awaits our hunt in this forest: semantics.

Some of these opponents to Marriage Equality have suggested that same-sex couples should be "content" with being granted "civil unions." Newsflash: all marriages are nothing more or less than social/civil contracts. That includes even "Holy Matrimony." You can live anything sacramentally, even the work of digging a ditch.

On the contrary, I have suggested and still continue pointing out: "Marriage" and "Holy Matrimony" are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!!!!!!!!!

Or more precisely, for any x, if x is Holy Matrimony, then x is Marriage, but not every Marriage is Holy Matrimony. There is no Holy Matrimony which is not Marriage, but there is Marriage which is not Holy Matrimony. This is called "an A Statement." Here, I'll show you a pair of Boolean Circles:

You'll note that the vesica piscis (the overlapping area of the two circles) there is entirely shaded in. One of the two circles represents a subject S, and the other represents a predicate P. This diagram says that all of the members of one exist solely in the other. Verily, Holy Matrimony is a type of Marriage and all Holy Matrimonies fall into the category of Marriage. Nobody disputes this.

Were the diagram showing one circle shaded in entirely, except for the vesica piscis area, it would represent "No S are P." That is "an E Statement." Since we don't have one here, I won't show the diagram. Sorry, bigots; I don't accept your contention that "no same-sex unions are marriages," because I know better, and the entire point of this is an attempt to educate you -- not to indoctrinate you, but certainly not to kowtow to your sacred cows nor enable your willful ignorance and fears. I will instead show you Boolean Circles illustrating I Statements and O Statements:

The top diagram shows an X in the vesica piscis, and represents "an I Statement," which is a proposition that "Some S are P." The lower diagram shows an X inside the S circle but outside the vesica piscis, thus graphically representing "Some S are not P," which is "an O Statement."

All examples of Holy Matrimony are members of the category of Marriage. (A Statement, All S Are P)
Some examples of Marriage are members of the category of Holy Matrimony. (I Statement, Some S Are P)
Some examples of Marriage are not members of the category of Holy Matrimony. (O Statement, Some S Are Not P)

Now, of course (I utter in mildly condescending terms), the rest of us are aware that some of you insist that the world was created in 4004 BCE and that "God," by which of course you mean your God, somehow "instituted" marriage between the (forgive me, but I have no desire to coddle your literalism or irrationality) mythical Adam and Chaivah (or "Eve," if you insist on the English form). Aside from the fact that your myth also refers to "the other people," and "the men of Nod," which ought, if your literalism were even remotely self-referentially consistent, to at least hint to you that your Adam and Eve were not the first humans, but fortunately, I'm not terribly interested in using your "beliefs" to demonstrate to you that you are inconsistent in the acceptance of what you claim to believe -- at least not presently. Instead, I would like rather to remind you, once again, of your heritage and the freedom of religion you now have as a result of the activism, tears, sweat, and blood of those who left that heritage to you.

America is not a Christian nation. Before you stop reading, consider why I say this and what I mean in saying it.

Adherents of many Christian sects migrated to "the New World" precisely to escape nations in which the government was married (you will forgive my further illustration of the equivocal nature of the term, I trust) to this or that sect's clergy and sought to impose the will of that clergy upon the masses, no matter the religious persuasion of the individual citizens. When they were establishing their communities and governments, they sought to do so in a way which would allow them to believe and practice as they saw fit. Pennsylvania was ab origine a haven for Jews as well as diverse sects of Christianity. Puritans and Pilgrims were not the only settlers in Massachusetts. The Merrymount Colony points to hints of non-Christians having come to these shores seeking freedom to live according to their own lights as well. The result was eradication by the less tolerant; in that there is some evidence of early efforts to enforce conformity. The same can be said of the later witch trials. Admittedly, this current runs deep in America, but it was rejected early as the constitutions of the states were prepared, before the Constitution of the USA, which proclaims not only that "Congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise ... [of religion]," but also that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

You may stomp your feet and cry and flail and rage. You may not deny. Neither your religion nor mine is acceptable as a source for legislation affecting both you and me. Why? Simple. I don't agree with your religious views, and thus should not be bound by them, and you don't agree with my religious views and should not be bound by them. Nor should either of us have to contribute financially to the work of the other's religion. We may agree in some particulars. Religions and Sacred Traditions do share some common features, and some have more in common than others, but commonality nevertheless exists in all. These common features, however, should not be emphasized to the point of obscuring the differences. I should not be expected to abide by laws based on religious teachings which I find ethically outrageous or rationally questionable. Here, however, let us consider exactly what this means.

Neither you nor I should be forced to pray to Antiochus Epiphanes or his image in some structure somewhere. You don't view the man in question as at all divine, and I don't view him as any more divine than anyone else, and marred by flaws in addition. In addition, Antiochus Epiphanes should not set up his image in a structure established for religious purposes by a distinct sacred tradition. Furthermore, Antiochus Epiphanes, being a government head, should not be promoting any religion in any way, whether it be the religion of megalomaniacal narcissism or something less ... unhinged. The government over which he sat was a government of a religiously pluralistic society, in which the rights of the minority should also be protected.

What it does not mean, however, is that I or anyone else has the right to impose restrictions on others which I place on myself by adherence to any particular (or universal, for that matter) religious teaching. We do not. If you believe that eating pork is a sin, then you are free to refrain from eating pork. If you believe that the use of certain words is something you should avoid, then you are free to avoid using those words. If you believe that your God would condemn you for marrying a person of the same sex, then you are free to refrain from doing so. If you believe that having an abortion would displease your God, then you are free to refrain from having one. Pork is not exactly my favorite meat, but I do eat swine flesh on occasion, and have no religious qualms about it. You do not have the right to prevent me from doing so, no matter how wrong you believe the act would be for yourself. I have very few taboos with regard to the use of language, and I do fairly often use words which others believe to be somehow forbidden (few know the origin of taboo words in English, nor how the cause thereof was anything but religious or ethical, but the information is not hidden), nor should any legislation impose a prohibition upon me with regard to those words based on socio-economic snobbery and cultural prejudice -- or the teachings of any religion. In the same way, no law should prohibit the representation of your God or the supposed name of that God in print or art, except a religious law binding only adherents of that religion. If I chose to have an abortion, I would not do so lightly or frivolously, but it would nevertheless be MY choice based on my reasons, and not your denial of such choice to me based on your views of what your religion teaches. Your religion is yours, not mine. I am not bound by its teachings, nor should I be forced to abide by the teachings of your religion any more than you should be bound by the teachings of the sacred tradition of my people. If I fall in love with another woman and she falls in love with me, and we connect on such a deep level that we would like to marry, that will be OUR choice based on our feelings and our reasons and our beliefs. It is NOT your right to deny us OUR rights, and all the more so is it not your right to deny anyone else their rights based on your religion, even if they share your religious views. You may encourage your own fellow sectarians to abstain from exercising all their rights; certainly most Baptist clergy discourage the exercise of the right to consume alcohol as a beverage, but the point is that even the members of their congregations still have the legal and civil right to purchase alcoholic beverages and consume them as potables, no matter the teachings of their religion on the act. Freedom of religion does not mean that you can impose religious restrictions on others, nor that you can discriminate against others in a free society. The very idea that one should defend a supposed "right" to do so is beyond shocking, and far from what we find in your own sacred texts (e.g., the epistle to the Galatians, which proclaims: "There is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.").

I'll point you also to the sixth chapter of Matthew, which can teach you many things, if you allow it to do so. Directed prayer in public schools, for example, is rather discouraged by Jesus in this chapter, along with pretending to be something you are not in order to improve the way others think of you (like the fake "Ex-Gay" personalities and all others who pretend to be straight in order to conform to the expectations of society). In fact, Jesus rather strongly condemned such hypocrisy.

You were slaves in Egypt. It's time to take the chains off, and use them for something more humane, rather than to simply perpetuate the cycle of abuse.

In other words, ...

Grow up and get over it.

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

The Right Wing and Allegations of Treason

The Right Wing and Allegations of Treason

by Liviana (Giovanna L.)

Representative Jeff Duncan, a Republican from South Carolina, joins a long list of Far Right Wing Extremists in branding with the "traitor" label those perceived as "liberals":

GOP's Duncan blasts Feinstein as a "traitor"

There’s been far too much of this sort of garbage rhetoric. The week before, Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) said of the torture report, “[I]t’s almost treasonous, and it borders on treasonous.”

Remember, these far-right lawmakers aren’t concerned about torture; they’re concerned with the Senate Intelligence Committee publishing a report documenting torture.

... Duncan was more direct in calling Feinstein a “traitor” – all because she had the audacity to work with her colleagues from both parties on a report documenting U.S. activities.

Duncan, by the way, is the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee’s oversight panel, and a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s panel on counter-terrorism.

After World War I, liberals and leftists were accused of treason by Far Right Wing Extremists in Germany. These allegations were also embraced by a certain Far Right Extremist political party in Germany, known as the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, or, in brief, as the Nazi Partei. The Nazis had a lot in common with the Far Right Wing Extremists in the United States today:

Intense nationalism
Pro-capitalism
Anti-communism
Glorification of War
Appeal to Patriotism
Appeal to the Middle Class
Appeal to Traditional Values

Note those last three say "appeal to ..." for a very good reason, one we can find in various writings of Niccolò Machiavelli. In Il Principe (or The Prince), he states rather plainly that it is important for a leader to seem to be religious, and says: "Everyone sees what you appear to be, few experience what you really are." Elsewhere, he offers an observation which is astounding for its accuracy:

... perché lo universale degli uomini si pascono così di quel che pare come di quello che è: anzi, molte volte si muovono più per le cose che paiono che per quelle che sono.

-- Niccolò Machiavelli, Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio, Libro Primo, Capitolo 25.

My translation:

... for the general mass of men are satisfied with appearances, as if they exist; indeed many times they are most moved by the things which seem to be rather than by the things that are.

-- Niccolò Machiavelli, Discourses on the first Ten Books of Titus Livius, Book 1, Chapter 25.

Something similar is attributed to Jesus in the sixth chapter of Matthew, verses 1-21, wherein is stated that those who pretend piety publicly in order to win the respect of other humans have only the reward of such human respect, but those who are pious in secret will have a heavenly reward.

Making an appeal to patriotism is not the same thing as being patriotic; it means that the one making the appeal is exploiting the patriotism of those he or she seeks to influence.

Making an appeal to traditional values does not necessarily mean that the one making the appeal agrees with those values, but rather that he or she is willing to exploit the beliefs of those who do in an effort to influence them. Accompanying this tactic is a not-very-subtle insistence that anything which challenges those beliefs is somehow disloyal and should be silenced, which is of course a practice antithetical to any free society.

Promising tax relief to the middle class while giving massive cuts to the upper class -- well, we need not even point out that the small cuts in income tax were subject to compensation by other taxes on the middle class, nor point the finger at the absurd government bailouts of mega-corporations and mega-banks which began, it must be stressed, under the administration of George W. Bush, even though Obama is subjected to the blame game by these Far Right Wing Extremists who never admit that their own party is equally guilty, and in fact endorsed such acts until they were done by a member of an opposition party (which, you know, is kind of par for the course; Republicans railing against Democrats for things they themselves have done, or would have done in the same position -- and vice-versa, let it be stated, for the Democrats have likewise contributed to this fallacious polarization in the American political climate, albeit not so eagerly as have the Republicans). Let me just say that the Far Right cares nothing for the middle class, except insofar as they can exploit the emotions, values, and needs of the middle class in order to obtain, or maintain, political power.

Tied into many of these features is the practice of scapegoating as a means of misdirection. Blaming homosexuals for an alleged "moral decline," blaming Jews for economic woes, blaming immigrants for "taking jobs" (usually jobs nobody wants), blaming labor unions for economic woes, blaming "liberals" and "leftists" for publicizing the criminal acts of Far Right Wing Extremists, ... the list goes on. And of course, always with the intent of diverting the attention of the public from issues which are actually relevant and important. "Let's make an amendment to the Constitution in order to 'protect the flag', a symbolic gesture easy to rally the masses, rather than addressing issues which are more challenging to solve, and more pressing." Or "Let's try President Clinton for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office instead of taking on the more challenging and more important business of making laws to better our nation and improve the living conditions of our citizens." Or "Let's sue Obama for making health care insurance available to all, rather than addressing the appalling state of education in the nation." Or any of a number of other examples.

Indeed, to accuse a patriot of being a traitor is the most outrageous of such obfuscations. While I disagree with Senator Feinstein on many questions, her actions in bringing this information to the public, while embarrassing for American citizens, is the act of a patriot, and not a traitor. Anyone who loves America ought to be tenacious in rooting out the rot which would turn our Democratic Federal Republic into what it has historically fought with the blood and tears of our people. Our nation took part in prosecuting those guilty of crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity at the Nuremberg Trials and on other occasions. Such crimes ought never to besmirch the reputation of America, but if they have been committed by Americans in the name of America, then we must admit as much to the world, and those responsible need to be held accountable in our own legal system. Such admission and prosecution are the only way forward. Those who would put their party or their ideology above the good of the nation are themselves far more worthy of the appellation of "traitor." I'm talking about you, "Representative" Duncan.

See further:

Fascism Anyone?

If conservatives really, really hate being called fascists ... #5

I got slimed by Rush: The real story of how Stephen Colbert schooled Limbaugh on U.S. history, patriotism

Stab-in-the-back legend

Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince and the Political Utility of Religion

Platform of the National-Socialist German Workers' Party (1933)
(Note point number 23 in particular, wherein the Nazis say:
"We demand laws against trends in art and literature which have a destructive effect on our national life, and the suppression of performances that offend against the above requirements."
It does sound very familiar, does it not?)

Monday, December 9, 2013

Feeding Children from the Tree of Death: Fundamentalism's Abusive Legacy

Uncharacteristically, I begin this post with my own comments, and then move on to quoting from the article on which I am commenting. I do this because this is a very important issue which has potential to adversely affect all of us (no matter what perspectives we hold), and the planet itself.

Anyone who has ever entered a Protestant Fundamentalist (authentically Fundamentalist, and not Evangelical, because there is a difference, even though the inexperienced/untrained conflate the two far too often) congregation's meeting hall and interacted with the members of said congregation, experiencing the situation with an open mind and some background in social sciences, will probably not be terribly surprised at the reports of child abuse contained in the article from which I quote a small portion below. What is more likely to surprise is the fact that some have managed to escape the conditioning. More noteworthy is the fact that they have developed the skills to combat the movement (and particularly its brainwashing efforts) effectively.

Something else to which the article alludes, and which deserves much attention, is the reproductive proclivity of the Fundamentalist cults, a technique they have learned from conspiracy theories concerning the Roman Church (which has been accused, by clergy members on the fringes of Protestantism, of growing a religious empire by means of condemning birth control). For over a decade now, Protestant Fundamentalists have included persons who have sought to stack the deck in favor of ignorance, superstition, irrationality, and bigotry, by means of having large families, and indoctrinating their unfortunate offspring in the dogma of their preferred brand of Christianity, which usually also involves the promotion of Far Right Wing Exremist economic philosophy (to the tune of Ayn Rand) and socially reactionary perspectives. The separation of church and state was, not that long ago, a distinctive doctrine of most Baptist sects in the United States; that is no longer the case. These fundamentalists, many of whom claim "Baptist" as part of their self-designations, have goals which include the imposition of their own religous biases on everyone by means of legislation, and their roadmap to success in that particular goal involves spawning more and more offspring and raising them to be voters who will support such initiatives and candidates who will push such initiatives. This is a very frightening reality, but it is indeed reality, and ignoring it is dangerous for the future of humanity and the earth itself.

What I will quote here from the article is merely some history of the homeschooling movement, and how it became usurped by fundamentalist fanatics, but the remainder of the article describes (in some detail) the ordeals of several children raised in Christian Fundamentalist homes, isolated from reality, and fed the poisonous fruit of the dogma of insanity, abused physically, emotionally, and intellectually. The article also describes how some have escaped those horrors, and how they have banded together to help others who are still imprisoned by their own parents, who view them not as human beings to be loved, nurtured, and cared for, but rather, as pawns to be exploited in a great "cultural" struggle.

From AlterNet:

Homeschooling didn’t begin as a fundamentalist movement. In the 1960s, liberal author and educator John Holt advocated a child-directed form of learning that became “unschooling”—homeschooling without a fixed curriculum. The concept was picked up in the 1970s by education researcher Raymond Moore, a Seventh-Day Adventist, who argued that schooling children too early—before fourth grade—was developmentally harmful. Moore’s message came at a time when many conservative Christians were looking for alternatives to public schools. ...

Moore’s work reached a massive audience when Focus on the Family founder and Christian parenting icon James Dobson invited him onto his radio show for the first time in 1982. Dobson would become the most persuasive champion of homeschooling, encouraging followers to withdraw their children from public schools to escape a “godless and immoral curriculum.” For conservative Christian parents, endorsements didn’t come any stronger than that.

Over the next two decades, homeschooling boomed. Today, perhaps as many as two million children are homeschooled. (An accurate count is difficult to conduct, because many homeschoolers are not required to register with their states.) Homeschooling families come from varied backgrounds—there are secular liberals as well as Christians, along with an increasing number of Muslims and African Americans—but researchers estimate that between two-thirds and three-fourths are fundamentalists.

Among Moore and Dobson’s listeners during that landmark broadcast was a pair of young lawyers, Michael Farris and Michael Smith, who the following year would found the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA). With Moore’s imprimatur and Dobson’s backing, Farris and Smith started out defending homeschooling families at a time when the practice was effectively illegal in 30 states. As Christians withdrew their children from public school, often without requesting permission, truancy charges resulted. The HSLDA used them as test cases, challenging school districts and state laws in court while lobbying state legislators to establish a legal right to homeschool. By 1993, just ten years after the association’s founding, homeschooling was legal in all 50 states.

What many lawmakers and parents failed to recognize were the extremist roots of fundamentalist homeschooling. The movement’s other patriarch was R.J. Rushdoony, founder of the radical theology of Christian Reconstructionism, which aims to turn the United States into an Old Testament theocracy, complete with stonings for children who strike their parents. Rushdoony, who argued that democracy was “heresy” and Southern slavery was “benevolent,” was too extreme for most conservative Christians, but he inspired a generation of religious-right leaders including Dobson, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson. He also provided expert testimony in early cases brought by the HSLDA. Rushdoony saw homeschooling as not just providing the biblical model for education but also a way to bleed the secular state dry.

With support from national leaders, Christian homeschoolers established state-level groups across the country and took over the infrastructure of the movement. Today, when parents indicate an interest in homeschooling, they find themselves on the mailing lists of fundamentalist catalogs. When they go to state homeschooling conventions to browse curriculum options, they hear keynote speeches about biblical gender roles and creationism and find that textbooks are sold alongside ideological manifestos on modest dressing, proper Christian “courtship,” and the concept of “stay-at-home daughters” who forsake college to remain with their families until marriage.

HSLDA is now one of the most powerful Christian-right groups in the country, with nearly 85,000 dues-paying members who send annual checks of $120. The group publicizes a steady stream of stories about persecuted homeschoolers and distributes tip sheets about what to do if social workers come knocking. Thanks to the group’s lawsuits and lobbying, though, that doesn’t happen often. Homeschooling now exists in a virtual legal void; parents have near-total authority over what their children learn and how they are disciplined. Not only are parents in 26 states not required to have their children tested but in 11 states, they don’t have to inform local schools when they’re withdrawing them. The states that require testing and registration often offer religious exemptions.

The emphasis on discipline has given rise to a cottage industry promoting harsh parenting techniques as godly. Books like To Train Up a Child by Michael and Debi Pearl promise that parents can snuff out rebellious behavior with a spanking regimen that starts when infants are a few months old. The Pearls claim to have sold nearly 700,000 copies of their book, most through bulk orders from church and homeschooling groups. The combination of those disciplinary techniques with unregulated homeschooling has spawned a growing number of horror stories now being circulated by the ex-homeschoolers—including that of Calista Springer, a 16-year-old in Michigan who died in a house fire while tied to her bed after her parents removed her from public school, or Hana Williams [6], an Ethiopian adoptee whose Washington state parents were convicted in September of killing her with starvation and abuse in a Pearl-style system. Materials from HSLDA were found in the home of Williams’s parents.

Read more:
Escape from Christian Fundamentalism - the Kids Who Flee Abusive, Isolated Christian Homes

Related (as linked in the article):

Homeschoolers Anonymous

Homeschooling's Invisible Children

Prohibited Research?

From Scientific American:

Imagine being an astronomer in a world where the telescope was banned. This effectively happened in the 1600s when, for over 100 years, the Catholic Church prohibited access to knowledge of the heavens in a vain attempt to stop scientists proving that the earth was not the center of the universe. ‘Surely similar censorship could never happen today,’ I hear you say—but it does in relation to the use of drugs to study the brain. Scientists and doctors are banned from studying many hundreds of drugs because of outdated United Nations charters dating back to the 1960s and 1970s.

Read more:
The Potential of LSD, Heroin, Marijuana and Other Controlled Substances in Brain Research

SuccubaSuprema writes:

The "guardians" of society (sometimes self-appointed, seldom qualified) have not uncommonly been biased by personal dogmatic beliefs, whether those beliefs were religious, political, economic, or something else. In the case of seventeenth-century astronomy, the bias of the "guardians" was religious, a biblical literalism which, however, was not consistent with the Tradition of the Church -- but then again, that Tradition itself is hardly self-referentially consistent, contradicting itself on any number of points. Indeed, as I have mentioned in previous posts here, a worldview colors one's perception of everything, and thus can result in distorted perceptions. In the case of substance research, several different beliefs have resulted in such skewed perspectives. In some cases, the culprit is a political viewpoint, in particular as relates to Philosophy of Law ("crime and punishment" and "protection of society" from perceived threats), without much regard for, or consideration of, the contentions of the medical community that addiction and dependence are medical situations, rather than (inherently) criminal. In other cases, a political viewpoint is again involved, but in a sort of "us versus them" mentality, such that the "guardians" arrive at their conclusions based on opposition to an alternate political viewpoint. In still other cases, economic viewpoints are involved, sometimes with vested interests (since Cannabis, for example, is an herb which can be grown almost anywhere, in widely varying conditions, its manufacture, distribution, and use cannot be effectively controlled -- and it cannot be patented, and thus, profits from Cannabis cannot be reliably restricted to the pharmaceutical industry, which has numerous less effective and potentially more harmful substances from which it wishes to continue to profit, regardless of the consequences for patients). In yet other cases, the bias is again due to a religious viewpoint, whether that be the anti-intellectualism and epistemophobia (fear of knowledge) which is so typical of religious fundamentalists, or a belief that the distribution and use of such substances are somehow contrary to the will of the divine and thus must be prohibited (disregarding any lack of justification for such prohibition on the basis of separation of church and state, ignoring the failures of past efforts at prohibition, and, in the specific case of Christianity, blatantly defying teachings of the religion itself, in particular as regards such teachings as are found in the fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters of the gospel of Matthew and the fourteenth chapter of the epistle to the Romans).

In still yet other cases, addiction and/or dependence, or even a perspective based on an idealized understanding of the psychedelic movement (which may itself have religious dimensions, as suggested by, for example, the writings of Carlos Castaneda, and/or claims made by Dr. Timothy Leary), must be acknowledged as capable of biasing conclusions, with those who wish to have license to use such substances themselves basing their conclusions on that wish.

In spite of the latter possibility, the potential for increased knowledge (both neuroscientific/psychiatric and otherwise medical) from research into these substances is far more relevant and important than the fears of those who have embraced ignorance, superstition, irrationality, and prejudice.

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Police in Miami Gardens Abusing Authority?

From the Miami Herald:

Earl Sampson has been stopped and questioned by Miami Gardens police 258 times in four years.

He’s been searched more than 100 times. And arrested and jailed 56 times.

Despite his long rap sheet, Sampson, 28, has never been convicted of anything more serious than possession of marijuana.

Miami Gardens police have arrested Sampson 62 times for one offense: trespassing.

Almost every citation was issued at the same place: the 207 Quickstop, a convenience store on 207th Street in Miami Gardens.

But Sampson isn’t loitering. He works as a clerk at the Quickstop.

So how can he be trespassing when he works there?

Read more (several videos are also available here):
In Miami Gardens, store video catches cops in the act

Monday, October 7, 2013

American Law Enforcement Becoming Militarized

From The Guardian:

Between the Armored Personnel Carriers locking down main streets in major American cities – mimicking our MRAPs in Afghanistan – or Special Weapons and Tactics (Swat) and Special Forces units canvassing our country, if we're not careful, this militarization of our domestic policing will make-over America, and fast.

Here's how it all happened. A little-known Pentagon program has been quietly militarizing American police forces for years. A total of $4.2bn worth of equipment has been distributed by the Defense Department to municipal law enforcement agencies, with a record $546m in 2012 alone. ...

Though the program's existed since the 1990s, it has expanded greatly in recent years, due, in part, to post-9/11 fears and sequestration budget cuts. The expanse, however, seems unnecessary given that the Department of Homeland Security has already handed out $34bn in "terrorism grants" to local polices forces – without oversight mind you – to fund counter-terrorism efforts.

Additional militarization, then, deserves congressional attention as the program is harmful and must be scaled back for a number of reasons.

First, the program is transforming our police into a military. The results of such over-militarized law enforcement are apparent from the dispersion of Occupy protesters in Oakland to the city-wide lockdown in Boston. ...

Tanks, grenade launchers, armored vehicles, and assault rifles are just a few of the items that have been transferred from military control to municipal police forces. Law enforcement agencies need only to arrange and pay for shipment in order to receive the items of their choice ... One particularly egregious example is found in South Carolina, where Richland County's sheriff acquired a tank with 360-degree rotating machine gun turrets. Sardonically, the vehicle has been named "the Peacemaker".

Swat teams, furthermore, are no longer found only in large, high-crime areas. Instead, even small rural towns now have the equipment to arm their own paramilitary units. Investigative reporter Radley Balko estimates that around 150 Swat raids are performed every day in the United States.

Read more:
America's police are looking more and more like the military

Related:
Police destroy the Garden of Eden

Do something!

Updates:

Militarization of America: Campus Cops Get Armored Vehicle Built to Withstand IEDs and Mines

Time to be Afraid in America: The Frightening Pattern of Throwing Police Power at Social Problems

Texas Campus Cop Kills Unarmed College Student After Sarcastic Remark

See also:
Police in Miami Gardens Abusing Authority?

SuccubaSuprema writes:

The fact that law enforcement officers are human beings, and therefore fallible like all other human beings, must be remembered, lest we invest them with too much authority and too much power.

Random Musings from a Muse

Avatar Badge & Content Advisory