Evolution for Creationists

"Over the years I have discussed evolution and creationism with a number of theists, and they often have many misconceptions about exactly what evolution is. I would like to try to set the record straight here, as well as provide a useful introduction to the theory of evolution."

Not that it'll do much good, but the next time you run into a creationist, or intelligent designer, as they're calling themselves today, try to explain to them what evolution is really about. They spend so much time trying to discredit it, yet they don't really seem to know what it all really means. But like I said, it probably won't do any good, because it's better to risk hell by following someone who claims to speak for God, then to be assured of going to hell, by listening to reason.

Pakistan Condemns Purported CIA Airstrike

Pakistan on Saturday condemned a purported CIA airstrike on a border village that officials said unsuccessfully targeted al Qaeda's No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri, but did not directly blame the United States for the attack, which left at least 17 people dead.

Villagers denied hosting al-Zawahiri or any other al Qaeda or Taliban figure, and said all the dead were local people.

On Saturday, more than 8,000 tribesmen staged a peaceful protest in a nearby town to condemn the airstrike, which one speaker described as “open terrorism.” Police dispersed a smaller protest in another town using tear gas. A mob torched the office of a U.S.-backed aid agency near Damadola, residents said.

Here's a report that puts a little perspective on my previous post;
U.S. Bombs Pakistan.

Regardless of our reasons (ie; excuses), it's clearly illegal to bomb countries we're not at war with, and murder innocent men, women, and children. When are we going to put a stop to it? When are you going to realize this doesn't "make you safe", it makes more terrorists.

A Time to Break Silence: By Rev. Martin Luther King

"By 1967, King had become the country's most prominent opponent of the Vietnam War, and a staunch critic of overall U.S. foreign policy, which he deemed militaristic. In his "Beyond Vietnam" speech delivered at New York's Riverside Church on April 4, 1967 -- a year to the day before he was murdered -- King called the United States "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today."

"Time magazine called the speech "demagogic slander that sounded like a script for Radio Hanoi," and the Washington Post declared that King had "diminished his usefulness to his cause, his country, his people."

Today he'd be accused of siding with the terrorists. He was constantly vilified and derided by the very people and institutions that are about heap praise upon him during February, the one month a year when the media suddenly remembers there are notable blacks who are creative, brave, honorable, influential, independant, prosperous, and most importantly, who are non-criminals, non-crack addicts, non-welfare dependant, and who did not just accept their expected place in society.

In a few weeks, you'll be listening and watching hypocritical media personalities place on pedestals, those same people they put so much effort into trying to crush at the time. They'll conveniently forget to mention their participation in the promotion of white supremacy, that's still alive and well today.

The speech from MLK jr, is about our activities in Vietnam, but can easily be substituted for the events of today. The page includes a link to an audio MP3, but as of this posting, it appears to be dead. I hope they fix it, I'd like to hear him. Anyway, the full text is on the page, so at least you can read it for yourself.

U.S. Bombs Pakistan

"Aircraft from Afghanistan have once more attacked Pakistan killing 18 Pakistanis in remote villages. Even non-US sources, such as Al-Jazeera has adopted the tone of embedded journalists, telling the world that the US attack on Pakistan killed 18 people in “a village stronghold of pro-Taliban Islamists.”

"This incident is yet another evidence that Musharraf has made Pakistan a big loser after September 11 with the misconception that it had no option except bending backwards to the US demands. His mantra: Pakistan had no option. It either had to join the US aggression or invite Bush’s wrath. Had Musharraf hesitated, the Americans would have clobbered Pakistan’s military and ‘strategic’ assets and allowed India to attack. By siding with Bush, Pakistan has been saved from American anger and its own “extremists.” It has also been able to break out of its isolation and rejoin the international mainstream."

"However, do we see any signs of such successes? Did the United States spare Pakistan? Are not our troops and people dying? The “president house” might be safe, but are the rest of homes in Pakistan safe from the American aggression? No one cares to answer a simple question. What would Pakistan have lost if it had chosen to negotiate the fine print of our cooperation with the US? Even America’s European allies—with the exception, of course, of Britain—took some time to make up their minds before rushing in with offers of help."

"Would Pakistan have been declared international terrorists if the spineless Musharraf had negotiated with some toughness instead of being dazzled by the sudden attention he started getting? Now that the euphoria has gone, what do Musharraf and his minions have to show for his caving in? Musharraf got his exclusive dinners with Bush and Blair and accolades from Zionist groups and Islamophobes. Beyond that, what did he get? The nation is facing what he wanted to avoid: aggression of the United States of American."

As you can see, from the perspective of a citizen of one of our "allies" in the war on terror, not even our "friends" get treated with any respect, if we can get away with it. From the very begining of our alliance with Pakistan, it's been clear that it's been no different than many of the allies we had during the Cold War. Then as now, we're using a weak, corrupt, dictatorship to advance our cause, to the detriment of their people. These kinds of partnerships led directly to revolutions that drove their people into the waiting arms of the Soviets' sphere of influence. After which, we'd have to go and re-liberate them through renewed subversion. Others were strong enough, and simply used our fanatical support of their "declared" anti-communist regimes, to kill any and all opposition to it's rule, communist or not. These alliances never benefitted the people other countries, only their rulers, since we supported the oppression of their people, so the rulers could remain in power and be our "friend". It explains why there's hostility towards the U.S. in Central and South America today. Iranian history is another example of what happens when we sponsor and manipulate unpopular leaders. And don't forget Cuban history either.

Can you guess the results of todays support of governments that go against the wishes of its' people? No need to guess, history reveals all, through it's repetition.

Bush Authorized Domestic Spying Before 9/11

And here we have more lies revealed. I've said it before, and maybe you didn't believe me, but everything the man says, are all lies. Everything. Even when he tries telling the truth (on those very rare occasions), he does it in such a deceptive way as to lead you to the wrong conclusion. In this case though, his explanation about domestic spying is just another one of his blatant lies.

"The National Security Agency advised President Bush in early 2001 that it had been eavesdropping on Americans during the course of its work monitoring suspected terrorists and foreigners believed to have ties to terrorist groups, according to a declassified document (PDF)."

"The NSA's vast data-mining activities began shortly after Bush was sworn in as president and the document contradicts his assertion that the 9/11 attacks prompted him to take the unprecedented step of signing a secret executive order authorizing the NSA to monitor a select number of American citizens thought to have ties to terrorist groups."

It must be tough for all of his supporters out there. Not the ones who work for him, or in some way benefit by all of his illegal actions, but the ones who've honestly believed his lies and justifications. They have to constantly defend their fearless leader, at every new revelation, or else they're forced into the unthinkable; to admit they've supported a budding dictator. And many just can't bring themselves to do that, yet.

[UPDATE Jan. 15 2006]

There now appears to be some question as to whether the allegations made in the above link, are accurate. It seems that more than one NSA program may be involved, and at least one may have been put in place by Clinton. Read the ongoing discussion here:
New Truthout Spying "Scoop" Doesn't Prove What It Says It Does

Firearms tracking device urged

Saying gun manufacturers should take steps to track guns, a Boston city councilor is proposing that global positioning technology be installed in firearms.

Councilor Rob Consalvo wants to put a tracking device into newly manufactured guns and have legal gun owners retrofit their firearms so owners and police can locate and retrieve stolen guns the same way police use a computer chip to locate stolen cars.

It never stops, does it. Once people agree to some new technology that the authories want, they just keep adding and adding to the list of things to use it for. People get cameras to monitor their own homes and businesses, then cities start using them to monitor traffic, so they can make a killing charging exorbitant fines for traffic violators. You get a GPS for your car so you can have instant directions, and get quicker emergency assistance, then they want them in every car, supposedly to make it easier to find stolen cars. You get a home alarm system which listens for sudden sounds, and they start using listening devices attached to utility poles, supposedly to listen for crime. This list goes on, and now they want GPS in your guns. They don't want you to have them anyway, and if this comes to be, they'll always know where your guns are.

You know, a gun is far less complex than a car, with far fewer parts, so it wouldn't be too difficult for a theif to find and remove a tracking device. They may catch a few dumbassess who don't know about it or bother to find it, but the authorities will always know where your gun is while you still possess it. You won't be able to switch it off, and if you're a good citizen, you won't remove it either. Determind criminals will find ways to get around these new technologies, but the government will always know where you are, where you're going, if you're armed, what you're driving, what you look like (even if disguised), your financial status, your medical condition, and what you had for lunch (if you use a credit card), all without ever approaching you. It's all just so damned sneaky, and so intimidating, which is the real purpose. If you know you're being watched, you'll behave like you're supposed to, unless you're a criminal, then you won't care anyway. But you are not a criminal, are you? So behave yourself, someone's watching.

All these things are cumulative and let the government keep track of all its' people, "to keep them safe". Again I ask: why do you all still say you live in a free country? There's nothing "free" about being constantly monitored, just in case a crime might be committed. This is what living in a culture of fear does, it causes you to give away your freedoms, your privacy, your right to make mistakes without someone spying on your every movement. Your right to just be unmonitored. Your own President can illegally spy on you, and you don't care, because he's promised he's doing it only to "keep you safe".

Allowing the media and the government to keep you in a constant fear of crime and terrorism has taken away all that once was called the American Spirit. Now, you're all just scared little kids, begging Big Brother to protect you, to keep you safe and warm.

U.N. Acceptance of 'Collatoral Damage' Worries Haiti Group

This page presents an open letter to the U.N. Secretary General. It expresses concern that the U.N. appears to accept collateral damage in Haiti, with little regard.

Dear Secretary General,

The Haiti Support Group, a British organisation promoting human rights and democracy in Haiti for over a decade, is very concerned to read the recent remarks made by Juan Gabriel Valdes, your Special Representative to Haiti, regarding the proposed deployment of UN troops in the Cite Soleil area of Port-au-Prince.

According to a January 8, 2006, report by the Reuters news agency, Mr Valdes told a local radio station, "We are going to intervene in the coming days. I think there'll be collateral damage but we have to impose our force, there is no other way."

The trouble with 'World Police' forces is that they tend not to be accountable to anyone. Why is it that when local police accidently kill an innocent by-stander, while in pursuit of a wanted criminal, there's loud public outcry, calls for investigations, and sometimes results in changes in policy regarding the way police handle situations when innocent people could get hurt, but in international "peacekeeping", whether it involves the U.N,, the U.S., or anyone else who considers themselves obligated to police other nations, can kill dozens/hundreds/thousands of civilians, and nobody cares? Nobody even notices.

A big problem with international forces is detachment. The forces involved don't know the country, community, the people, their culture, and most often, their language. That presents an insulating barrier in which those that are supposed to be helping, have litte real connection to the people they're "saving", and as a consequence, less compassion, if any. If they have to kill the innocent in order to save their lives, so be it, right? After all, no one who has ever been labeled as "collateral damage" has ever really been of any importance to the international powers-that-be. Case in point: 100,000+ Iraqi civilians dead. True, that example is from a war, but the results are no different when you send peacekeeping 'soldiers' to do a policemans' job, civilians just happen to get in the way of military objectives.

There's just something wrong when arbitrary military force is used to keep the peace before other, less damaging methods have even been tried. Such actions have become acceptable, along with it's inevitable consequence, namely that ridiculous euphemism; "collateral damage".

You know how they get away with it, no matter how many civilians get hurt in the process? Too many people, at this very moment, are sitting glued to their seats, watching and reading about Angelina Jolies' pregnancy, and other mind-numbingly nonsensical fluff that fills up what pretends to pass for "the news". No one's paying attention. No one cares. It's by design.

Religious Freedom For All

"From our founding forward, Americans have celebrated liberty and honored God in ways both public and private. Now activist judges seek to end all mention of God in the public square." So reads the flyer for the third “Justice Sunday” event sponsored by the Family Research Council (FRC) last Sunday night at a Philadelphia church."

"If the goal of this effort is to cause religious people to feel fear, alienation and anger, it succeeds brilliantly. If the goal is to tell them the truth, it’s a miserable failure."

"Led by the U.S. Supreme Court, the judiciary has long protected the right of individuals and groups to express their religion in our nation’s many public squares, even as it has prohibited the government from promoting religion."

"During a series of Justice Sunday events, however, the Family Research Council and its partners have repeatedly distorted church-state law and the motives of certain judges. As the Senate Judiciary Committee considers the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, it is important to set the record straight."

"At the outset, it should be noted that religion plays a visible role in many of the non-governmental sectors that are part of public culture, including the media, publishing and entertainment industries. This public role for religion raises no constitutional concern."

"Regarding religious expression in public schools, FRC President Tony Perkins has claimed that the court has "said our children don’t have a right to pray," but he is clearly wrong. While public school teachers cannot lead their classes in prayers or Bible readings, the court has said: "[N]othing in the Constitution as interpreted by this Court prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the schoolday."

That last paragraph is a just one example of how certain people are willing to lie to promote their religious ideaology. The whole issue of "activists judges" is a tactic in the effort to eventually alter the Constitution to allow the establishment of state religion. It's ludicrous to say there's a "war on Christianity" in this country, but it plays well, if you distort the facts, making listeners feel besieged by heathen hordes of Satans' minions. It brings in a lot of cash too.

It's not as if these religious leaders actually believe that they're under attack, they know the truth. They understand the Constitutional ban on a State sponsored religion. They're counting on their uninformed followers to believe in what they say is happening, and what they're saying to them, is all a lie.

The issue isn't in allowing Christians to practice their faith, nothing has ever prevented them from doing so. The issue is about power. It's about establishing religious law, because they don't really believe in religious freedom at all. They've created a false perception of Christian persecution in order to justify a push towards federal protections that would inevitably result in a theocracy based on the ideology of one particular group.

An example of how outrageous their claims can become, was expressed during the past holiday season, by claiming that what was in reality, a retail courtesy to respect all the religious views of their customers, as a direct attack on Christmas. A simple effort to be polite, was twisted into the propaganda which is encouraging Christian fears of isolation and persecution. A total non-issue, as is the rest if this fantasy they call a "War on Christianity".

Lies and deceptions, are the tools of false prophets, not honest Christians.

Create an e-annoyance, go to jail

"Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime."

"It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity."

"In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess."

"This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison."

Did you read my last post? The one about 'They Thought They Were Free'? While that one was an indictment on the beginings of government oppression, this one is a perfect example of why our government is so big in the first place. This is about oppression by the people. This is caused by you, you and your idea that government is supposed to protect you against absolutely everything, which it's always happy to try to do, as it gets to have more power. This isn't a new problem, but one that began when we created this democracy. But for the last several decades, these types of laws have been multiplying at a ridiculous rate.

Why do you people still insist you live in a free country, when you push government to create more and more restrictions on what people can do and say? Are you really that sensitive that you need a law to keep people from annoying you now? You really want annoying people to be criminalized? What sissies you are.

With all the real problems in the world, you want someone who merely annoys you to be thrown in jail. This isn't about someone who does you real harm, like hacking your computer for info to steal, or find where you live and stalk you. This isn't about someone who sends you a virus and destroys all your files. The wording of this law is designed to keep people from hurting your feelings, you poor thing.

You can blame politicians for this law if you want, but it didn't come out of thin air. Things like this grow out of grass-roots organizations that you create or join to address a legitimate problem, but when the problem gets addressed, that organization still exists, then begins to seek out new problems to justify its continued existance. If it can't find a real one, it creates one and blows it out of proportion. By doing that, it gets publicity, new members, more dues, more sponsors, and more importantly, more political power.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm all for government stepping in when there's a real problem that causes you physical or financial harm, but when an issue affects neither, get over it, and move on.

P.S. If you're part of this problem and I've offended you, know that "Jack" is not my real name, so if you have a problem with free speech, you'd better report me (which of course will result in my feelings being hurt, then I can take advantage of this law too).

They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45

The following is from a page that has an except of a book written decades ago, on how the German people were slowly pacified and manipulated into complying with the, then new, Third Reich. To those who are already aware of the state of current events, this is woefully familiar. To those who've fallen prey to the propaganda that we hear on a daily basis, denial will persist, since "this is America, it couldn't happen here."

But it is happening here. The evidence is all around, but is considered "unpatriotic" to look at too closely, and to be "with the terrorists", if one makes any objections. Within a very short period of time, you have accepted an eternal war against an ideology with accompanying omnipotent powers granted to the State, condoned unprovoked war based on lies, welcomed measures that effectively removes all your Constitutional rights without really "making you safe", allowed the establishment of a culture of fear, designed to make you even more susceptible and complacent to further abuses by your government towards yourselves and the peoples of the world. You gladly promote and encourage the complete reversal of all the American ideals you claim to hold so dear.

"What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it."

"To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it—please try to believe me—unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’ that no ‘patriotic German’ could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head."

Some of us do see, but we can't correct it alone.

The Disappeared - A New Treaty

Not for the first time, world justice is being tugged in two opposite directions. The latest developments in international law mean that the duty to prosecute those involved in forced disappearances – arbitrary arrest, frequently followed by torture and murder – is clearer than ever. After two decades of discussion a key new draft treaty agreed in September, is likely to be adopted by the UN General Assembly this year. At the same time, the world’s most powerful government apparently believes it is authorised to disappear people if and when it wishes. Washington argues, in effect, that this is helping to make the world safer, and those who are concerned about disappearances are giving comfort to the perpetrators of terror.

The article goes on to mention other countries that have engaged in making people disappear, of course naming Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, among others. It also talks about the Latin American countries that used that technique in the past, and now, having purged themselves from those atrocities for the most part, are leading the push for this U.N. treaty. The leaders of the opposition include one which also takes the lead in making people disappear, Russia, and the other, the U.S..

This treaty is a good thing, but it's going to take a lot more than something we're not about to sign, to make our government stop this activity. It's shameful that we ourselves haven't taken any real measures to stop this, still foolishly accepting the nonsence of illogical reasoning, outright lies, the trashing of our Constitution, and demonizing of anyone who dares even question the methods used in this so-called war on terror. Nothing, absolutely nothing, that was done to us on 9/11, can justify the crimes we've committed since. We've done more damage, killed more people, removed more liberties from ourselves and the rest of the world, and ensured that new terrorist will be created everyday, than Bin Laden could have ever hoped to achive. All this, is to our shame.

Amputees have star roles in war games

Grandma used to say that there's a silver lining inside every dark cloud and maybe she was right. This month, Harper's magazine has found a big, heartwarming silver lining inside that gloomy old Global War on Terrorism. Here it is:

The United States government has hired a bunch of poor souls who lost their arms and legs in accidents and has rigged them up with bags of fake blood so they can play wounded civilians in war games down at Fort Polk, La.

uuuh, ok, I'm speechless....

The American Taliban

Here's a page the gives quotes from some very influential people in American society. These people, as you'll see, are fanatical in their beliefs, to the point of being downright dangerous. They're advocates of hate, and seek only divisiveness, and they do it by spreading lies and misconceptions.

Here are a few of the more famous names listed......

Ann Coulter:
"Being nice to people is, in fact, one of the incidental tenets of Christianity, as opposed to other religions whose tenets are more along the lines of 'kill everyone who doesn't smell bad and doesn't answer to the name Mohammed'"

Apparently she's never looked into the history of Christianity.

George Bush Sr.:
"I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

Yeah that's right, the persecution of non believers is truely the Christian way.

James Dobson of Focus on the Family:
"State Universities are breeding grounds, quite literally, for sexually transmitted diseases (including HIV), homosexual behavior, unwanted pregnancies, abortions, alcoholism, and drug abuse."

I guess all others are paragons of virtue. Or maybe he really just doesn't like his tax money helping to educate the less financially able.

Jerry Falwell:
"AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals. To oppose it would be like an Israelite jumping in the Red Sea to save one of Pharoah's chariotters."

How compassionate, for a Christian.

Jimmy Swaggart:
"Sex education classes in our public schools are promoting incest."

My, times have sure changed since I was in school.

Joseph Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League:
"I would like to outlaw contraception...contraception is disgusting – people using each other for pleasure."

Yes, that God-given ability to actually enjoy sex is so...so...so ungodly. Long live the middle-ages.

Pat Buchanan:
"There were no politics to polarize us then, to magnify every slight. The "negroes" of Washington had their public schools, restaurants, bars, movie houses, playgrounds and churches; and we had ours."

So I guess lynching a "negro" for looking at a white woman, couldn't be considered "magifying a slight". The falacy of the "good old days" lives on.

Pat Robertson:
"Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It's no different...More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history."

Aside from being an obvious lie, he also wants people to believe Christians today are being made to suffer much more than the African slaves, the genocide of the Native Americans, forced labor of Chinese imigrants, internment of Japanese Americans, persecution of homosexuals, etc., and I'll assume that by "any minority in history" he means only American history, or else I could go on and on and on...

Yep, these racists, sexists, and elitists, are the self-rightious voices of Christ. Don't you feel the love?

The lie detector you'll never know is there

"The US Department of Defense has revealed plans to develop a lie detector that can be used without the subject knowing they are being assessed. The Remote Personnel Assessment (RPA) device will also be used to pinpoint fighters hiding in a combat zone, or even to spot signs of stress that might mark someone out as a terrorist or suicide bomber."

"In a call for proposals on a DoD website, contractors are being given until 13 January to suggest ways to develop the RPA, which will use microwave or laser beams reflected off a subject's skin to assess various physiological parameters without the need for wires or skin contacts. The device will train a beam on "moving and non-cooperative subjects", the DoD proposal says, and use the reflected signal to calculate their pulse, respiration rate and changes in electrical conductance, known as the "galvanic skin response". "Active combatants will in general have heart, respiratory and galvanic skin responses that are outside the norm," the website says."

A peek into the future. If they succeed in getting such a product under developement and into use, expect it to eventually show up at a police department near you. Expect it to be used on a wide scale like video surellence camaras are now, that you find on public streets. Expect to find them in stores and banks, as a way to pick out potential shoplifters and robbers. Expect them to be used by employers during job interviews. Expect them to be placed in schools, And expect small hand-held models to be sold to the general public.

Follow Your Money to the Republicans or Democrats

"Whatever you buy you are supporting a political party - find out which one!"

You all know that whenever you purchase an item, part of that money goes towards the advertisements that drew you to the product in the first place, but have you thought about how your money spent on ordinary products, goes to political parties and their candidates?

This site lets you search or browse a product name to see who that company makes political donations to. For instance, if you buy Dial soap, you'll find that the Dial Corporation spent $92,210 in contributions. Of that, $77,759 went to Republicans, and $14,451 went to Democrats. Useful information if you vote with your wallet.