What a Week
The last week of September pretty much slipped by me. After getting behind on the news during the Labor Day weekend, then being inundated with pretty much nothing but the news of Katrina and the mind-boggling incompetence and callousness of the democratically-elected government that is supposed to be looking out for us, a lot of other stuff just got overlooked. So here's a recap of some of the things that you may also have missed, or perhaps merely glossed over.
PFC Lynndie England was convicted on six counts for her role in the infamous Abu Ghraib scandal: one count of conspiracy, four counts of maltreating detainees and one count of committing an indecent act. England, who is best known for smiling while holding one detainee on a leash, and posing with others while they were in forced into humiliating positions (naked, piled atop one another, etc.) is only 22 years old.She has been described as having an "unusually pliant" personality. She is uneducated, appears to have below average intelligence. She was also having an affair, at the time the photos were taken, with then-Cpl. Charles Graner Jr., who is currently serving time for his part as the "ringleader" in the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal. Graner is also the father of England's son, and was her supervisor while at Abu Ghraib.
While she faces prison, the men responsible for a system that recruits the poor and ignorant and then places them in positions of power over those they've been taught to hate, while simultaneously failing to instill even the most basic checks on the abusive behavior those same ignorant lackeys are instructed to perform by their even more ignorant (but infinitely more experienced) "superiors" continue to operate with impunity.
Meanwhile, here in the States, a company named AdvoCare began marketing their newest product, a breakfast drink for kids. According to the New York Times, "The drink, called Spark, contains several stimulants and is sold in two formulations: one for children 4 to 11 years old that includes roughly the amount of caffeine found in a cup and a half of coffee, and one containing twice that amount for teenagers and adults."
AdvoCare is promoting the product as a "nutritional supplement" and says Spark is designed to help youngsters to "develop fully as a high-performance athlete" by filling "nutritional gaps." While AdvoCare claims that the drink contains a variety of helpful nutrients, critics are quick to point out that drugs containing caffeine are required, by law, to have a label on them, warning them not to be given to children under 12 years of age because "too much caffeine may cause nervousness, irritability, sleeplessness and, occasionally, rapid heartbeat."
Spark, considered a food, not a drug, requires no such label. The company, a direct marketing enterprise, is based in Texas. (Why does that not surprise me?)
Meanwhile, in San Francisco, that homosexual den of iniquity that makes most Texans blush, the Board of Supervisors has passed "the strongest anti-sweatshop legislation in the country." The legislation requires that tax dollars spent on uniforms, sheets and towels go to companies that pay their workers a fair minimum wage and provide safe working environments. It also forces companies to provide a guarantee that they will not employ children, foreign convicts or slave labor.
And in Washington, our nation's capital (fast becoming the religious center of the universe), FEMA, the organization that couldn't, is drafting plans to reimburse the faith-based organizations that could, and did, come to the rescue of thousands of displaced Hurricane Katrina victims. President Bush appears to have completely forgotten that charity means, well, charity. He is fixing to use federal tax dollars to reimburse organizations that voluntarily provided shelter, food, water and clothing to the homeless.
But he's only talking about reimbursing faith-based charities. Non-faith-based charitable contributions from folks like doctors (and various other groups and individuals) who showed up in New Orleans to help, when FEMA was conspicuously absent, will not be reimbursed. Of course, non-faith-based groups didn't really do all that much. In fact, one doctor up and left in the middle of administering to a patient. Of course, that's because FEMA forced him to stop--right before they sent him away. I guess he screwed up when he showed up, unannounced, and began to administer chest compressions to a dying woman. Apparently, he was supposed to have foreseen the need to register with FEMA before assisting in the disastermath; his valid medical license was not good enough for FEMA. They needed to be able to find him in their system--the same system that broke down entirely and did nothing for several days.
Yet faith-based groups (that hand out a bible with every meal) appear to have managed to avoid the scrutiny of FEMA. The Bush administration's position is clear: The doctor who practices only medicine and not evangelical Christianity is unnecessary during times of crises; however, the rank and file bible thumper is not only welcomed, but will be paid for his service--by you--the people of the democratically-elected government that has written into its Constitution that there must be a separation of church and state. Ah, but lest we forget: Bush is also from Texas.(As is Tom DeLay, who has now, finally, been indicted for something--it was really only a matter of time).
And last, but not least, on September 24, there was a large and well-organized march, in Washington, against the war. While TruthOut.org covered it in great detail (by the way, if you haven't already, please consider contributing to TruthOut.org--they need the money almost as much as we need them), the New York Times conveniently left out the numbers, saying only "vast numbers" of protesters converged on Washington.
I was surprised at the lack of detail, because the coverage from TruthOut made it look like a pretty big deal. So, I broke down a paid for a copy of the full archived Times article and came across this: "Organizers of the rally and march had a permit for100,000 people, but the National Park Service no longer provides official estimates for large gatherings in Washington."
Wow, no estimates for large gatherings in Washington. When did that happen? I guess it must have been about the time Bush and his buddies realized that numbers actually mean something.
There is more, of course, this is just the start. I figure I'm going to need to catch up a week at a time. I can't wait to find out what happened during the first week in October. -- Laurie
PFC Lynndie England was convicted on six counts for her role in the infamous Abu Ghraib scandal: one count of conspiracy, four counts of maltreating detainees and one count of committing an indecent act. England, who is best known for smiling while holding one detainee on a leash, and posing with others while they were in forced into humiliating positions (naked, piled atop one another, etc.) is only 22 years old.She has been described as having an "unusually pliant" personality. She is uneducated, appears to have below average intelligence. She was also having an affair, at the time the photos were taken, with then-Cpl. Charles Graner Jr., who is currently serving time for his part as the "ringleader" in the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal. Graner is also the father of England's son, and was her supervisor while at Abu Ghraib.
While she faces prison, the men responsible for a system that recruits the poor and ignorant and then places them in positions of power over those they've been taught to hate, while simultaneously failing to instill even the most basic checks on the abusive behavior those same ignorant lackeys are instructed to perform by their even more ignorant (but infinitely more experienced) "superiors" continue to operate with impunity.
Meanwhile, here in the States, a company named AdvoCare began marketing their newest product, a breakfast drink for kids. According to the New York Times, "The drink, called Spark, contains several stimulants and is sold in two formulations: one for children 4 to 11 years old that includes roughly the amount of caffeine found in a cup and a half of coffee, and one containing twice that amount for teenagers and adults."
AdvoCare is promoting the product as a "nutritional supplement" and says Spark is designed to help youngsters to "develop fully as a high-performance athlete" by filling "nutritional gaps." While AdvoCare claims that the drink contains a variety of helpful nutrients, critics are quick to point out that drugs containing caffeine are required, by law, to have a label on them, warning them not to be given to children under 12 years of age because "too much caffeine may cause nervousness, irritability, sleeplessness and, occasionally, rapid heartbeat."
Spark, considered a food, not a drug, requires no such label. The company, a direct marketing enterprise, is based in Texas. (Why does that not surprise me?)
Meanwhile, in San Francisco, that homosexual den of iniquity that makes most Texans blush, the Board of Supervisors has passed "the strongest anti-sweatshop legislation in the country." The legislation requires that tax dollars spent on uniforms, sheets and towels go to companies that pay their workers a fair minimum wage and provide safe working environments. It also forces companies to provide a guarantee that they will not employ children, foreign convicts or slave labor.
And in Washington, our nation's capital (fast becoming the religious center of the universe), FEMA, the organization that couldn't, is drafting plans to reimburse the faith-based organizations that could, and did, come to the rescue of thousands of displaced Hurricane Katrina victims. President Bush appears to have completely forgotten that charity means, well, charity. He is fixing to use federal tax dollars to reimburse organizations that voluntarily provided shelter, food, water and clothing to the homeless.
But he's only talking about reimbursing faith-based charities. Non-faith-based charitable contributions from folks like doctors (and various other groups and individuals) who showed up in New Orleans to help, when FEMA was conspicuously absent, will not be reimbursed. Of course, non-faith-based groups didn't really do all that much. In fact, one doctor up and left in the middle of administering to a patient. Of course, that's because FEMA forced him to stop--right before they sent him away. I guess he screwed up when he showed up, unannounced, and began to administer chest compressions to a dying woman. Apparently, he was supposed to have foreseen the need to register with FEMA before assisting in the disastermath; his valid medical license was not good enough for FEMA. They needed to be able to find him in their system--the same system that broke down entirely and did nothing for several days.
Yet faith-based groups (that hand out a bible with every meal) appear to have managed to avoid the scrutiny of FEMA. The Bush administration's position is clear: The doctor who practices only medicine and not evangelical Christianity is unnecessary during times of crises; however, the rank and file bible thumper is not only welcomed, but will be paid for his service--by you--the people of the democratically-elected government that has written into its Constitution that there must be a separation of church and state. Ah, but lest we forget: Bush is also from Texas.(As is Tom DeLay, who has now, finally, been indicted for something--it was really only a matter of time).
And last, but not least, on September 24, there was a large and well-organized march, in Washington, against the war. While TruthOut.org covered it in great detail (by the way, if you haven't already, please consider contributing to TruthOut.org--they need the money almost as much as we need them), the New York Times conveniently left out the numbers, saying only "vast numbers" of protesters converged on Washington.
I was surprised at the lack of detail, because the coverage from TruthOut made it look like a pretty big deal. So, I broke down a paid for a copy of the full archived Times article and came across this: "Organizers of the rally and march had a permit for100,000 people, but the National Park Service no longer provides official estimates for large gatherings in Washington."
Wow, no estimates for large gatherings in Washington. When did that happen? I guess it must have been about the time Bush and his buddies realized that numbers actually mean something.
There is more, of course, this is just the start. I figure I'm going to need to catch up a week at a time. I can't wait to find out what happened during the first week in October. -- Laurie
posted by LA Fosner at 11:15 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home