Jesse Ventura appeared on The View and spoke plain truth about torture, i.e., waterboarding is torture. If you can bear it, listen to Elisabeth Hasselbeck chattering away in support of torture (even though she claims that she is against torture). Ventura won't put up with Hasselbeck's inanity, and puts the blame squarely where it belongs, given that U.S. torture hasn't exactly been a recent revelation to anyone who gave a crap about it.
I'm truly disgusted to learn of newest evidence for the religious underpinnings for Donald Rumsfeld's (and George Bush's) thought process. GQ has revealed that Rumsfeld authored an entire series of Bible/war memos, "Top Secret Briefings," to get Bush fired up that he was on God's side in a Manichean struggle.
This mixing of Crusades-like messaging with war imagery, which until now has not been revealed, had become routine.
For those who say that religion is good, that is sometimes true. Many people have been inspired by religion to channel their natural empathy into acts of kindness. To those who say religion is dangerous, that is also sometimes true, as witnessed by America's religious war waged in Iraq. Thanks to the Bush Administration's application of religion, 100,000 people are dead, tens of thousands of Americans wounded, and millions of Iraqis who have lost their homes. I would say, as a general rule that we should always discourage violence in the name of religion. Religion is too often a potent mind-altering trip. Too often, it causes people to unplug their pre-frontal cortices, so that their base instincts, especially their xenophobia, rise's to the top. Religion is too often used to concoct needless imaginary lines between and among groups of people, resulting in growing distrust, which too often ripens into seething hate. Bottom line: Thanks to Rumsfeld's (and Bush's) embrace of what we now know (better than ever) to be religious violence, our "secular" government was able to conclude that their religious ends justified their military means, and that any lie, any torture, and any amount of collateral damage was justified. All of this in the name of God.Frank Rich has just written an article pointing to a wide variety of Bush Administration scandals about to be revealed. He urges President Obama to let the information flow because there is a momentum to the process and it is, in fact, inevitable. The strangest one, in my opinion, is Donald Rumsfeld's private bible quote laden newsletter. Strange and revealing, though not at all surprising. Rumsfeld's newsletter, entitled Worldwide Intelligence Update, was:
[A] highly classified digest prepared for a tiny audience, including the president, and often delivered by hand to the White House by the defense secretary himself. These cover sheets greeted Bush each day with triumphal color photos of the war headlined by biblical quotations. GQ is posting 11 of them, and they are seriously creepy.
Take the one dated April 3, 2003, two weeks into the invasion, just as Shock and Awe hit its first potholes. Two days earlier, on April 1, a panicky Pentagon had begun spreading its hyped, fictional account of the rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch to distract from troubling news of setbacks. On April 2, Gen. Joseph Hoar, the commander in chief of the United States Central Command from 1991-94, had declared on the Times Op-Ed page that Rumsfeld had sent too few troops to Iraq. And so the Worldwide Intelligence Update for April 3 bullied Bush with Joshua 1:9: “Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be terrified; do not be discouraged, for the LORD your God will be with you wherever you go.”
Josh Silver of Free Press tells us why metering threatens the Internet
Cable companies Time Warner and Comcast, and phone giants AT&T and Verizon sell the vast majority of high-speed Internet service in the United States. Phone and cable companies like these have no other competition in 97% of US markets, thanks to corrupt policies passed by the Bush Administration at the companies' behest.
These duopolies are betting on the future of their "triple-play" phone-Internet-TV service, so that you'll pay them more than $100 per month and they can keep earning record profits. They know that if you start downloading video from online innovators like Hulu.com and Roku.com, eventually you won't need their expensive, advertising-ridden television service. If you decide to use online phone providers like Skype, you won't need their expensive phone service. The answer? Jack up the cost of Internet, and once again eliminate the competition.
But that's not all. Metering Internet usage also has ramifications for journalism.We continue to learn about Madonna's adoption problems and Ms. California's old photos, but if you want substance in your news, you'll have to look beyond corporate media's steady stream of sensationalism, celebrity gossip and product placement. We need fast, neutral, affordable Internet that can deliver video, audio and other multimedia to enable efficient production and distribution of journalism and other educational content.
If I'm reading Silver correctly, he's not totally against all surcharges for truly high-volume users. And it does make sense, in the abstract, that those who barely use any bandwidth would pay less than those who stream videos and music all day. But I agree with Silver's concerns that the telecoms need to be closely regulated on this issue. But who would do the regulating, given that the telecoms have successfully purchased undue influence over Congress with their ostensibly legal campaign contributions? It seems as though we need campaign finance reform before we're going to have Congressional independence on any issue. On a separate issue relating to media, consider listening to Arianna Huffington's testimony before the Commerce Communications subcommitte, chaired by Senator John Kerry. She makes many worthy points. I am concerned, though, that she is overly optimistic that journalism would thrive in a world without newspapers. Based on what I see, much of the Internet is filled with content that has its origin with traditional newspapers and news magazines. Many these newspapers are doing terrible work because they're laying off reporters and because they put profits way ahead of journalism. Yet I'm not convinced that Internet news sites are ready or able to step into the void to do this job well enough on the scale handled by traditional media outlets. I hope I'm wrong about this--I hope that we are about to see a golden age of Internet journalism--because I don't see newspapers ever making a big comeback.The banks "own the place." What place? Congress. Who would say such a shocking thing? Someone relatively trustworthy: Dick Durbin. Consider this from Huffpo:
Only 45 Senate Democrats voted Thursday to oppose the banking industry and pass legislation aimed at stemming foreclosures. The bill would have allowed bankruptcy judges to allow homeowners who met strict conditions to renegotiate mortgages -- a process known as cramdown. It would have only applied to mortgages entered into before 2009.
Earlier in the week, the measure's lead proponent, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), concluded that banks "frankly own the place."