|
|
Tuesday, November 26, 2002
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chris Floyd writes: A country whose leader has the power to imprison any citizen, on his order alone, and hold them indefinitely, in military custody, without access to the courts, without a lawyer, without any charges, their fate determined solely by the leader's arbitrary whim -- that country is a tyranny, not a democracy, not a republic, not a union of free citizens. Now, it may be that it is still a tyranny in utero, a rough beast slouching toward Bethlehem -- or in this case, Washington -- to be born, and not yet the full-blown monster, fangs bared and back plated with bristling armored scales. But the tyranny has been conceived, it's taken root in the womb, gained definite form and is clawing, tearing its way toward the light. President George W. Bush openly claims that he now holds this power of arbitrary arrest and imprisonment. His minions defend it with earnest arguments. They have already begun acting on its dictatorial tenets. If this claim is not rejected by the other two branches of government -- an unlikely event, with both branches now held by Bush partisans -- then the fundamental liberty of every American citizen will have been stripped away finally and completely. Henceforth, liberty is not the inalienable right of the citizen, but a privilege granted -- or not -- by an autocratic government. What we are witnessing is the mutation of a democratic republic into a military autocracy: Bush bases his claim of arbitrary power on the president's constitutional role as commander-in-chief of the U.S. armed forces. Although there is nothing in the constitution that warrants the extension of military command to cover arbitrary rule over the entire citizenry, and certainly nothing that countenances the abrogation of basic rights and liberties on the unchallengeable say-so of an all-powerful leader, the "commander-in-chief" argument nevertheless serves a useful purpose for the autocrat, creating the illusion of a limited and temporary suspension of liberties -- a drastic but necessary "wartime" measure. (11/26/02) | |
|
|
|
Donivan Bessinger, MD writes: In The Collective Unconscious, we considered the problems for society when ego-level religion confronts science, which by its nature is predominantly an ego-level activity. Science, in its collective conscious, must not attempt to suppress the spiritual values of mankind. Society must insure that its technology serves the biosphere. Society must not capitulate to technology's seemingly inherent imperative to operate as an autonomous complex out of control of ethical interactions. If the collective conscious must make distinctions to avoid a conflict of science versus religion, it must also be careful to avoid allowing science to function AS religion. Dr. Carl Sagan, in television's Cosmos series and in his books, is a master teacher, presenting the urgencies of mastering our potential for knowledge, and promoting the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. Such a search holds promise of great adventure. Yet, with an almost religious intensity, that adventure is presented as holding potential for learning new solutions to mankind's problems. (11/26/02) | |
|
|
|
BBC Science -- A new genetically engineered variety of rice, which can grow in all types of conditions, has been developed by scientists in the United States and Korea. The researchers added sugar genes from a bacterium to create their improved plant. The genes allow the rice to maintain yields even it is stressed by cold, drought and high salt levels. The sugar leaves the chemical composition of the rice grains unchanged. It is hoped the new crop will help farmers in developing countries be more productive on poor land, increasing yields by up to 20%. As the word's population continues to rise, many scientists are looking to genetic engineering to improve food production. One approach is to engineer plants that will thrive on difficult land conditions. ... Other crops from the grass family - like corn (maize), wheat, barley, sugarcane and rye - are closely related to rice. In theory, they too could be modified using the same techniques. ... the latest research from Professor Ray Wu, at Cornell University in New York, and colleagues could see millions of hectares of low-yield farmland experiencing improved production. ... Professor Wu said that work was already under way on corn and wheat to try to make them more tolerant to droughts, salinity and extreme temperatures. "In principle, it is likely to happen, but it has to be proved experimentally." The technology will be placed in the public domain, rather than being sold to a commercial seed company, so that improved crop varieties can be grown in areas of the world where soil and weather conditions make it difficult to farm rice. The research is published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (11/26/02) | |
|
|
|
Jonathan Peterson writes: Declan McCullagh's Politech has a transcription of Peter Chernin's (CEO of Fox) Comdex keynote speech, which is so full of false truths and misstatements that I've spent much of the weekend breaking it down. At a very fundamental level, the Big Content companies don't understand the revolution that is happening in the digital media realm. They still see us as consumers only capable of digesting their offerings and handing over money. They really don't seem to understand that the reason we are buying PCs, video cameras, digital cameras, broadband connections and the like is that we want to create and share our creations. The quality of "amateur" content is exploding at the same time that Big Media companies are going through one of their all-time lows in music and television creativity. No wonder we're spending more time with our PCs that we are with our TVs. (11/26/02)
| |
|
|
|
Osama bin Laden writes: It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind: ... You are the nation that permits Usury, which has been forbidden by all the religions. ... You are a nation that permits the production, trading and usage of intoxicants. You also permit drugs, and only forbid the trade of them, even though your nation is the largest consumer of them. ... You are a nation that permits gambling in its all forms. The companies practice this as well, resulting in the investments becoming active and the criminals becoming rich. ... You are a nation that exploits women like consumer products or advertising tools calling upon customers to purchase them. You use women to serve passengers, visitors, and strangers to increase your profit margins. ... You are a nation that practices the trade of sex in all its forms, directly and indirectly. Giant corporations and establishments are established on this, under the name of art, entertainment, tourism and freedom, and other deceptive names you attribute to it. ... You are a nation that practices the trade of sex in all its forms, directly and indirectly. Giant corporations and establishments are established on this, under the name of art, entertainment, tourism and freedom, and other deceptive names you attribute to it. ... And because of all this, you have been described in history as a nation that spreads diseases that were unknown to man in the past. Go ahead and boast to the nations of man, that you brought them AIDS as a Satanic American Invention. ... You have destroyed nature with your industrial waste and gases more than any other nation in history. Despite this, you refuse to sign the Kyoto agreement so that you can secure the profit of your greedy companies and industries. ... Your law is the law of the rich and wealthy people, who hold sway in their political parties, and fund their election campaigns with their gifts. (11/26/02) | |
|
|
|
The London Guardian -- Jonathan Freedland writes: The word of the hour is empire. As the United States marches to war, no other label quite seems to capture the scope of American power or the scale of its ambition. "Sole superpower" is accurate enough, but seems oddly modest. "Hyperpower" might appeal to the French; "hegemon" is favoured by academics. But empire is the big one, the gorilla of geopolitical designations - and suddenly the US is bearing its name. ... Today a liberal dissenter such as Gore Vidal, who called his most recent collection of essays on the US The Last Empire, finds an ally in the likes of conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer, who earlier this year told The New York Times, "People are coming out of the closet on the word 'empire'." He argued that Americans should admit the truth and face up to their responsibilities as the undisputed masters of the world. And it wasn't any old empire he had in mind. "The fact is, no country has been as dominant culturally, economically, technologically and militarily in the history of the world since the Roman empire." But is the comparison apt? Are the Americans the new Romans? The most obvious similarity is overwhelming military strength. Rome was the superpower of its day, boasting an army with the best training, biggest budgets and finest equipment the world had seen. No-one else came close. The US is just as dominant - its defence budget will soon be bigger than the military spending of the next nine countries combined, allowing it to deploy forces almost anywhere on the planet at lightning speed. Throw in its technological lead, and the US emerges as a power without rival. (11/26/02) | |
|
|
|
BBC Science -- The potential of the UK's offshore wind farm industry remains largely untapped, according to a government document. Energy Minister Brian Wilson said the Future Offshore document was a "major step forward" in developing the market. The Solway Firth in Scotland to North Wales and the Thames Estuary are the main focus of the drive. Greenpeace said the move showed the government had taken its "blinkers off" and the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) thought it heralded "the birth of a new industry". ... Matthew Spencer, of Greenpeace, said: "The pro-nuclear argument has been knocked for six by this report which shows that offshore wind alone can deliver 40 times more power than all of the UK's nuclear reactors. "The government must now follow through with the minimum of a 30% target for renewable energy nationally to ensure that big wind farms at sea get built." (11/26/02) | |
5:56:49 AM 
|
|
|
|
© TrustMark
2002
Timothy Wilken.
Last update:
12/3/2002; 8:09:20 AM.
This theme is based on the SoundWaves
(blue) Manila theme. |
|
|
