Category Archives: defense contractors

Domestic violence mirrors war

by

I swear that I did not see this before making my previous comment on the connection between domestic violence and war.  Wow, what a timely article.

From the article:

Some 3,073 people were killed in the terrorist attacks on the United States on 9/11. Between that day and June 6, 2012, 6,488 US soldiers were killed in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, bringing the death toll for America’s war on terror at home and abroad to 9,561. During the same period, 11,766 women were murdered in the United States by their husbands or boyfriends, both military and civilian. The greater number of women killed here at home is a measure of the scope and the furious intensity of the war against women, a war that threatens to continue long after the misconceived war on terror is history.

~~~~~~~

On the photos taken of the violence at home:

The photos are remarkable because the photographer is very good and the subject of her attention is so rarely caught on camera. Unlike warfare covered in Iraq and Afghanistan by embedded combat photographers, wife torture takes place mostly behind closed doors, unannounced and unrecorded.

~~~~~~~

An excellent point–because in Communications, the Vietnam War is known as the media war —a war that was lost because of the diligence of the press–they brought the war home every night on the nightly news.  People could see with their own eyes what was happening–politicians in Washington could not whitewash it.  The violence we were doing to others could not be denied.  The thought of a photographer taking photos while someone commits domestic violence makes my stomach turn…and at the same time, I’m thinking “is this what it takes to make it *real*….???”  Do the people have to see photos of women beaten to a pulp on the nightly news, every night to grasp how horrible this is?

Here’s another report on domestic violence in Africa following war.  Does the war cause domestic violence or is it a cycle repeating itself?

 

 

The bombing

by

Bear with me, I’m still trying to move stuff, so I’m trying to keep up with the news of the Boston bombing, and may have missed something…

What strikes me about the story is that everyone around these two brothers describe them as “normal”.  That is, they didn’t talk of guns and violence, and no indication of their wanting to harm the public by setting off bombs.  Of course, you would expect that from the parents, but others are saying it, as well.  And the uncle?  He was livid at what they had done and demanded they turn themselves in (before they were caught).

The one detail that is pretty much downplayed here is that Tamerlan had a police record for hitting his girlfriend.  Domestic violence will not be given the importance that it deserves, as far as character and indicator of disregard for boundaries.  This, I believe, is a bigger reason for what happened…somehow Tamerlan got the idea that hurting someone weaker than you is okay–perhaps he saw it in the home.  I would go out on a limb here and say that if the reporters would dig, they would find a link to domestic violence in situations such as this.  I think religion is just an excuse for justifying the behavior.  Islam also has the “do unto others as you would have done unto you…” in the q’uran, so this goes against their religion.

Something else that bothers me is the recent statement by George W. Bush, who announced that he wasn’t sorry for anything that he has done.  Has anyone explored that as incitement to the Boston bombing?

And does anyone else see the irony of the definition of sociopath being applicable to both boys and Bush?

 

Thatcher

by

Protests at her funeral here.

On the Mirror site, someone commented that they should put her in a black bag and put her out with the rest of the trash.  Okay, that’s a little harsh.  But spending  10 million is too, too much, especially for someone who promoted austerity.

Funny how people who advocate austerity measures never include themselves as recipients.

Bush isn’t sorry

by

common dreams has this up on an unapologetic George W. Bush .  The cartoon says it in ways that words could never come close.

From Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary:

so·cio·path Listen to audio/ˈsoʊsijəˌpæθ/ noun

plural so·cio·paths

[count] : someone who behaves in a dangerous or violent way towards other people and does not feel guilty about such behavior
— so·cio·path·ic Listen to audio /ˌsoʊsijəˈpæθɪk/ adjective
▪ a sociopathic personality ▪ sociopathic behavior ▪ He is sociopathic.
~~~~~~~~~~
Oil company profits and/or new business from the Iraq War.  This was one of my arguments for my friend who was in the military–that the war was being fought for oil.  She was adamant that we would not be lied to about weapons of mass destruction.
From the article:
At the same time, representatives from ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Halliburton, among others, met with Cheney’s staff in January 2003 to discuss plans for Iraq’s postwar industry. For the next decade, former and current executives of western oil companies acted first as administrators of Iraq’s oil ministry and then as “advisers” to the Iraqi government.

~~~~~~~~~

Note further down the word privatization.  Sound familiar??

I tried to search for Afghanistan profiteering, but coming up empty.  I’ll wager that it’s the same, since there is an oil pipeline there.

I found this on the companies that profit the most from war.

Feeding the dark side.

 

 

Finding the Art

by

I’m sad to say that I just discovered this today, after having been here three years….but I couldn’t have afforded it, anyway, so it’s bittersweet…

They posted a funny advertisement poster on the grocery’s bulletin board, but I couldn’t find the corresponding poster on their website.  It’s called “Disaster Preparedness” and mocks the rules of Preparedness.   One rule was that there was probably a disaster underfoot if the electricity has been shut off, your cell phone doesn’t work, your neighbors are hysterical, and dogs are no longer running through the streets…:p

This site promotes the films I like.  I love, love, love independent films that aren’t the same old, same old.  I like the ones that make me think–that make me step outside the box….

….and I like the ones that highlight the aspects of society that are not all glamour, such as The Station Agent.   I picked this up at the library, and am sad that I’ll not get to see it anymore once I leave here.  It’s one of those tales that you don’t see that much out of Hollywood–and it’s well written enough that you empathize with Fin without feeling sorry for him.  It’s a wonderful story of friends’ experiences in life–a story of every day people.

 

 

Targets of drones not always criminal

by

common dreams has a link up to this McClatchy piece on the targets of drones–an estimated 3,500 people killed.

From the piece:

“The United States has gone far beyond what the U.S. public – and perhaps even Congress – understands the government has been doing and claiming they have a legal right to do,” said Mary Ellen O’Connell, a Notre Dame Law School professor who contends that CIA drone operations in Pakistan violate international law.

~~~~~~~~~~~
Mary Ellen O’Conell, from that radical leftwing university of Notre Dame.  :p
More:

The administration has declined to reveal other details of the program, such as the intelligence used to select targets and how much evidence is required for an individual to be placed on a CIA “kill list.” The administration also hasn’t even acknowledged the existence of so-called signature strikes, let alone discussed the legal and procedural foundations of the attacks.

~~~~~~~~
Does anyone else see the irony of Diane Feinstein being so anti-gun violence a la Newtown, but apparently thinks drone strikes are okay??
I also have an issue with calling drone strikes “self defense”.  It is self defense when you are face to face with someone and they are coming at you with fists, guns, or knives–then by all means, you have a right to defend yourself.  But hiding a thousand miles away in some darkened room with television monitors while you pull the trigger….um, no…not self defense in my book.  It’s cowardly.

Thatcher

by

The comments here are priceless on Margaret Thatcher’s passing.  Gah, I used to think so well of this woman in my repub daze.  Arrgh.

And even if I had the money, I would not have seen Meryl Streep’s version of her.  I was afraid that the worst would not come out, and from the comments on the movie, my guess was accurate.  Trying to make her into someone to admire?  Wow, Streep has gone so far away from Silkwood. 

The comments on feminists praising Thatcher as being a woman that “made it” is spot on.  One doesn’t have to look any farther than Hillary Clinton to see that.

I mean, really, Clinton makes a big deal about being asked about her clothes, and there are feminists who applaud that thinking she’s being assertive. Pfft.  Men are asked about the suits they wear.  I wouldn’t know what an Armani suit was if not for that.  And a man could not walk into a courtroom, to use the above example, in jeans and flannel shirt and expect to be given the same consideration from a judge that he would if he were wearing a suit.  Men notice other men’s suits, but they’re not as obvious about it.  It may come out as “hey, nice suit” and left at that.

Should a person be judged by appearance?  Absolutely not.

In my personal observation, we are becoming worse about judging folks by the outside instead of the inside.  Our cultural programming, from watching shows like Survivor, among other things,  buys into the notion that others are superior.  Some see clothes as an indicator of superiority.  I remember that it wasn’t so much so before we moved away from an agricultural (family farm) culture.  I remember when Levi’s became the preferred jean and you were “uncool” if you didn’t have those jeans.  Uncool = lesser person.  This also coincides with “poor person”,  btw….

Somehow our culture became twisted along the way and “rich people” became associated with “good people”.  Being poor, one comes to assess folks not on their bank accounts, but on their actions.  What do they do with their funds?  Do they help others or spend their time degrading others and, like the Kochs, do their best to make sure that they have it all?

 

Anyway, Margaret Thatcher and Ronnie Reagan were the architects of what we’re dealing with today–the culture of greed.  “I’ve got mine, screw you.”   or “I’ve got mine, and I want yours, too.”