SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: T L Comiskey who wrote (83741)10/20/2006 6:04:55 AM
From: James Calladine  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 361695
 
The Bright Side of MCA 2006?

by Karen Kwiatkowski

Constitutionalists, liberty lovers, and those who recognize the true nature of the leviathan state rightfully despair of the latest law of the land. The Military Commission Act of 2006 is a disaster of epic proportions, as Keith Olbermann and others have noted.


This unfortunate law is a tsunami originating in the underground statism and overt imperialism of America in the 20th century. A critical disturbance has occurred deep below an ocean called "War on Terror," with its imagined fearsome fleet called "Islamofascism." It is a tectonic crash that resonates deeply in the generalized anxiety of Americans who vaguely sense that the future for their children is going to be very different than they hoped.

Americans should be anxious. The enemy is already inside the gates. In fact, the enemy now mans the gates. At the risk of being targeted sooner or later for anti-governmental think-crimes, let me be clear. The enemy manning our gates is any president occupying our nation’s unitary executive suites. Today, this is George W. Bush, with his puppetmasters, political playpen pals, and those associated with his administration and his political party. Tomorrow it will be another power hungry do-gooder who speaks of accountable government, while welcoming unlimited personal compromise, backroom deals, more war, less freedom, and other people’s money.

The tsunami of MCA 2006, like all tsunamis in the open ocean, causes no stir, no alarm. It gives little warning, and only those who understand the ocean and are watching for just such a disturbance notice what has happened.

Only when its energy is constrained by underwater mountains and solid coastlines will it become dangerous, destructive, and deadly. Innocent people will then be swept away, their investments and their livelihoods destroyed, their children, spouses, friends and lovers lost to them. When the eventual destruction of MCA 2006 strikes home, many of us will be forced to start over, if we survive at all.

But this was supposed to be an upbeat article! Where’s the fun, the merriment, the sheer delight that thinking and reflective creatures ought to take in all things state?

Imagine, dear reader, if you will, one of the first applications of this antiterrorist legislation, sans habeas corpus, flaunting all executive power, all the time. Young Mr. Bush is soon for the ranch, mumbling strangely to himself and his rare visitor about how he coulda been somebody (other than Nixon on crack). But it is the next Tyrant of the United States who will delight today’s contrarians.

Imagine – briefly – if you will, the pasty-faced, well-fed, overbearing Richard Perle, or the political canine David Frum. Imagine, if you will, our amusing curmudgeon of a Defense Secretary and his pal Dick Cheney.

Each of these has lauded, associated, and given moral, if not material support, to the Iranian terrorist group known as MeK.

According to past legislation, presidential signing statements and the MCA "Death to Habeas Corpus" Act of 2006, these lucky pundits, secretaries of defense, and vice presidents may be held incommunicado, without access to a lawyer, without being told of the "evidence" against them, without access to a court of law or an independent judge. Wait …I left something out. Held indefinitely. Perhaps secretly. Might they be bound and gagged, sexually humiliated, frightened by dogs or sub-standard enlistees and overzealous and poorly trained officers, or the odd contractor? Why not?

Far be it from me to wish evil on those who have dished out enough death, enough lawlessness, enough stupidity, and enough arrogance at home and in foreign countries like Afghanistan and Iraq for ten lifetimes. I am genuinely concerned that with a turn of the screw, the screws may be indeed be turned on these well-known, high-profile advocates of Iranian regime change.

Among the war lovers, perhaps some dormant awareness of the dangers of cavorting with someone else’s terrorist group exists. The American Enterprise Institute’s Michael Rubin and Michael Ledeen have both this year sought to publicly distance themselves from the MeK (while simultaneously associating the Democrats with the terrorist group). Rubin got in trouble in January 2006 with the less prudent of the war-rabid with an article entitled "Monsters of the Left: The Mujahedin al-Khalq." In July of this year, Ledeen, responding to assertions in James Bamford’s "Iran: The Next War," wrote that "I wouldn't get within a hundred miles of the MEK."

Sorry? Can you speak up, Michael, and Dick and Don and Mr. Perle? The problem for these guys (beyond protesting too much) is that with habeas corpus no longer required, the search, detention, and indefinite imprisonment of people any reigning government or its civil servants find unsavory, untrustworthy, critical or adversarial – dare I say criminal? – is legal, and this law will be enforced in the name of Freedom, Peace, Democracy, and Security.

Will the ACLU or the antiwar movement truly and aggressively jump in to prevent figurative and literal waterboarding of those who promoted our police state at home, and cheered the creative destruction visited upon certain oil producing states abroad? Our native human weakness and moral opportunism finds its expression in organized politics, but is not political. We humans are, as ever, minutes from mob-hood, and we cultivate the very finest of short-term memories. We collectively froth at the bit to see harsh justice done to those we "know" to be guilty.

As the Republic crumbles before our eyes, we of the anti-war crowd may find a chuckle or two in the early applications of the Military Commission Act of 2006 by the next administration. And perhaps, as we whisper and tap out codes to our esteemed neoconservative cell-mates, we will get the answer as to why the United States really went to war in the Middle East.

October 20, 2006

Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D. [send her mail], a retired USAF lieutenant colonel, has written on defense issues with a libertarian perspective for MilitaryWeek.com, hosted the call-in radio show American Forum, and blogs occasionally for Huffingtonpost.com and Liberty and Power. Archives of her American Forum radio program can be accessed here and here. To receive automatic announcements of new articles, click here. This article originally appeared on MilitaryWeek.com.

Copyright © 2006 Karen Kwiatkowski

Karen Kwiatkowski Archives



Find this article at:
lewrockwell.com



To: T L Comiskey who wrote (83741)10/20/2006 9:36:01 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 361695
 
We have that effect.



To: T L Comiskey who wrote (83741)10/20/2006 10:41:35 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 361695
 
British wildlife head north as planet warms by Elodie Mazein
Fri Oct 20, 5:33 AM ET


LONDON (AFP) - Biologists have discerned a mass migration of fauna over the past 25 years as animals try to outrun global warming by heading for cooler climes in the north.


Studies by the University of York have shown that 80 percent of some 300 monitored species are on the move, abandoning areas they have inhabited for millennia and heading 70 to 100 kilometres (40 to 60 miles) north.

"Our sample is large enough to be sure about the pattern of change," said Chris Thomas, professor of conservation biology at the university.

"Eighty percent is a surprisingly large percentage ... It's amazing how strong and already visible is the signature of climate change."

Animals studied by the university included insects, mammals, vertebrates and invertebrates. Seventy percent of the species found to be on the move were heading to higher ground, up to 150 metres (495 feet) above their normal habitats.

Some scientists predict that average temperatures in Britain will increase by 3.5 degrees Celsius (38.3 degrees Fahrenheit) between now and 2080. Over the past century they have climbed just 0.6 degrees, but the 1990s was the hottest decade on records going back some 400 years.

"Average global temperatures in 2100 will probably be higher than for at least two, and quite probably 10 million or more years," Shaw said.

"The average lifetime of species is mainly between one and 10 million years. Thus, approximately 10 to 99 percent of species will experience global average conditions that they have not encountered previously.

"About 10 to 15 percent of land species seem to be at risk of eventual extinction from climate change."

London's Kew Gardens are an unlikely setting for wildlife discoveries but even here scientists have found depressing signs of a planet in flux, in the form of hairy, stinging caterpillars which normally live in southern Europe.

Britain's butterflies are also sending out warning signals. From 1970 to 1982 the number of new species of butterflies found in Britain was only about a third of what had been expected, meaning less biodiversity.

"Climate change is expected to reduce the number of species globally," the Royal Society, Britain's national academy of science, said recently.

Scientists are now asking how, years from now, species from the south are going to interact with those from the north as they increasingly start to compete for food and habitats.

"We think that the southern species, already adapted to a warmer climate and which have in general two breeds in a year, are going to win," said Thomas.

"Evolution of the northern species will take place but not fast enough to stop ... some species going extinct."
news.yahoo.com