Weapons of Mass Enlightenment

Resident to be fined for peace X-mas wreath

This is the kind of story that sends my blood pressure up and really makes me forget about my work.

The lead of this AP article is brilliant:

DENVER - A homeowners association in southwestern Colorado has threatened to fine a resident $25 a day until she removes a Christmas wreath with a peace sign that some say is an anti-Iraq war protest or a symbol of Satan...

Some residents who have complained have children serving in Iraq, said Bob Kearns, president of the Loma Linda Homeowners Association in Pagosa Springs. He said some residents have also believed it was a symbol of Satan. Three or four residents complained, he said...more

Here is my suggested response to Mr. Kearns:

Dear Mr. Kearns,

Thank you for your quick response to some of our resident's concerns.  It shows your commitment to serving this community of neighbors. 

Actually, my wreath is an international symbol of peace.  Traditional symbols of Satan usually have to do with evil looking faces with large protruding horns.  Often this figure has a tail and is holding some sort of pitch fork.  The color red is omnipresent.  My wreath, if you look closely is made of green twigs.

As for the wreath being an anti war symbol, in fact it is not.  If you notice, 'war' or 'Iraq' do not appear on the wreath.  Of course the wreath as a peace symbol, can be just as easily interpreted as a sign of support for our troops.  Aren't they fighting for peace?  Yes, I think so.

If you believe that the wreath is anything other than a wreath, this seems to be a perception problem on your part.  That's OK, I understand.  Lots of people have trouble with reality these days, its just so confusing when you really, really believe one thing, but something else is true.  This is called an ideology, and if you have one about America's place in the world and the war in Iraq, please don't interpret my Christmas decoration as an attack on those beliefs.

If this letter doesn't help, I suggest a psychiatrist, I think one may really help you.

Peace be with you,

LLHA resident

Climate Crusade

As much as I hate the word crusade, it is a good adjective to describe Gore's drive to make people aware of climate change and its consequences.

He spoke at the Guardian Hay Festival in Britain in the Spring, and its the longest interview I've seen him give.   I think the timing of Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" is significant.  In fact, I think he is brilliant.

All over the place people are talking about the climate..its a hot issue right now.  The International Panel on Climate Change is coming out with a report, scientific debate on the issue, according to Gore is over, California has taken huge steps, regulatory and legal (actually suing care makers over climate related damages...look a few posts down) to address the issue.  On top of that, governments in Europe and reportedly Japan are developing markets for trading carbon emission permits, Canada's conservative government has brought the issue to the forefront of political debate, and climate conference has just wrapped up in Nairobi.

As if that isn't enough, investment in green technology is reportedly high as investors hope to earn money with start up companies looking to market scores of products.  According to The Economist Magazine, the conditions are ripe for an alternative energy boom.  Apparently there are six parts to the sector:

1. wind   2. solar   3. bio-fuel   4. carbon trading   5. developing technology   6. energy efficiency

Wind generation is the biggest section of the sector - 28 countries are increasing wind capacity.

What does this mean for Al Gore and the environmental movement?  It means that the climate issue is finally getting political clout.  No longer can governments (except maybe in America where it is so heavily influenced by oil companies) just ignore the problem or try to side step it by pretending there is some great uncertainty about it that requires time to assess.  Al Gore has positioned himself as the leader in bringing the issue into the spotlight.  No matter what you say about his politics, Gore is an ultimate visionary.  He saw the opportunity in the internet before it was the internet, he realized television was moving in the direction of user generated content, and now he's grabbed the spotlight with global warming. He is a little bit ahead of his time.

The most interesting part of the interview is when he talks about the relationship between political action and the citizenry.  He knows we have the technology to start turning around carbon emission totals but the political leaders need to be forced into action by an aware, caring, united public.

America has finally gone blue - now what?

Prominent democrats like Murtha and Carl Levin are calling for some sort of withdrawal of troops from Iraq, either gradually, or all at once.  Carl Levin particularly seems to feel the American people have vehemently decided that they want troops out, as he's been telling the talk shows.  He is a respected politician but he must be overstepping his ground.  People voted for a change of course in Iraq, but that doesn't mean they necessarily want a pull out.  By saying things like "the people have spoken" Levin recalls memories of Bush's 2004 election win when he talked as if the vote of "the people" was the equivalent of a permission slip to implement his entire conservative agenda.

Here is the thing with a pull out.  It has to be a strategy for the future not the reversal of a mistake made three and a half years ago.  That mistake to invade Iraq should be held against politicians to political effect, not to try to undue the original mistake.  America can't uninvade Iraq. A pull out now brings a lot of uncertainty.  I think staying to train Iraqi military and working closer on the impression of American soldiers as aides to Iraq rather than occupiers needs to happen.

The Huffington Post has a good post about Iraq policy here.

This of course will not solve the deeper problem in the area which lies with Israel.   Israel is where the answer to the "war on terror" lies.  Of course there is no such thing as a war on terror.  There is only a war on "mostly displaced and humiliated Muslims who have no other way of dealing with an Israel that lies on their land without giving compensation and an America that arms and supports it."  Yeah, and some fundamentalist criminals who can only live with a destroyed America.  But let's distinguish the two and deal with them differently.  Lesson not yet learned.

Don's Tricks

The Chris Ferguson Show did a fantastic skit of Rumsfeld doing a press conference.  Not to be missed.

President Introduces Rumsfeld's replacement

Too busy watching the mid term election to really wrtite anything about it.  Just go to crooksandliars.com for the latest news, video.

This is interesting though, introduction of Bob Gates and relieving Rumsfeld..watch here