Entries from October 2004 ↓
October 12th, 2004 — brain-candy, impolite company
New Scientist, the respected British science and technology magazine, has a special section this week on the scientific issues involved in the US presidential elections. The section, titled “Are You Listening, America”, provides a series of essays on current US policies and political trends regarding global warming, stem cell research, abortion policy and petroleum-dependency.
Besides these obvious issues, there are some very insightful essays on the effects of our post-9/11 fear of foreigners on the pursuit of science in the US. Whereas the US used to be first choice for foreign students interested in advanced scientific study, that is becoming less the case:
A recent survey by the Council of Graduate Schools of 113 American universities found a 32% plunge in foreign applications as top science students in many countries choose to stay home rather than go through the process of entering the US.
And concerns are emerging that foreign scientists will continue to be scrutinised even after they arrive. In April, a report prepared jointly by the Association of American Universities and the Council on Governmental Relations found that some government grants and research awards place restrictions on the involvement of foreign scientists. And last month, the Department of Homeland Security gave the FBI access to databases to track foreigners, including foreign scientists.
There are also essays on the effects of globalisation on scientific pursuits and on the global perception of hypocrisy in the US stance on nuclear non-proliferation in other countries, while developing new weapons here.
All in all, its a comprehensive and very informative look at the intersection of science and politics in the US. The one failing in the collection of articles is that, like so many other exercises in “fair” journalism, this article bends too far backwards in attempting to find some balance and ascribes unwarranted moderation to the acts of an administration that finds more certainty in the Bible’s predictions of the end times than it does in scientific explanations of global climate change.
October 11th, 2004 — the web-wide world
Christopher Reeve died yesterday. Although he played an action hero in the movies, performing his own stunts, standing tall as the epitome of American strength and character, it was later on, with such feats as moving his index finger, that he demonstrated that his true strength was in believing that the impossible was possible, and setting out to make it so.
I’m not usually one to get all sappy about celebrity deaths, but, I truly believed that Reeve would live forever, and that one day, he would get up out of that wheelchair and walk on his own. Imagine what could have been gained toward that goal if the past 4 years had not seen a virtual freeze on American stem-cell research. Give to the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation, and vote for John Kerry. There are millions more who would benefit from a national commitment to compassion without the cheap moralizing and pandering politics of the current administration.
October 10th, 2004 — impolite company
We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They’re illegal. They’re against the United Nations resolutions, and we’ve so far discovered two. And we’ll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong, we found them.
– George W. Bush, in an interview with Polish TVP, May 29, 2003
Well, he was only off by a year. As pointed out in another excellent report by Bob Drogin of the LA Times,
The Other Weapons Threat in Iraq, “a little-noticed section of [Duelfer's] 960-page report says the risk of a ‘devastating’ attack with unconventional weapons has grown since the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq last year.”
Although Duelfer’s group discovered there are several groups working to develop WMDs, the LA Times report discusses the one group about which most is known. This group, Al Abud, which was neutralized in June 2004, had a number of failures, but then, success finally came
…in late March when the two chemists working together produced ricin cake, a substance that can be converted to ricin poison. Investigators later determined that their lab could produce only enough ricin to cause isolated casualties and “was not capable of facilitating a mass-casualty ricin attack.”
They also found that the two scientists had prepared napalm, a highly flammable jellied gasoline used by U.S. troops in Vietnam, and sodium fluoride acetate, a poison. But Duelfer’s group said the nascent effort was “highly unlikely” to be capable of causing mass casualties.
Of course, Duelfer’s team discovered the group by chance. And it turns out that this group had no ties to Hussein’s regime and its scientists who had been working on the chemical munitions program prior to the first Gulf War. These were chemists, who, for ideological reasons, or for cold hard cash, decided to try their hands at manufacturing chemical weaponry. And, as the Times reports about Al Abud:
For now, the leaders and financiers of the network “remain at large, and alleged chemical munitions remain unaccounted,” the report says. It adds that other insurgent groups are “planning or attempting to produce or acquire” chemical and biological agents throughout Iraq, and says the availability of chemicals and munitions, as well as sympathetic former Iraqi weapons scientists, “increases the future threat.”
So, like every other unintended consequence of this whole fucked-up adventure, our intervention in Iraq has actually created the danger of WMDs being used against Americans and American interests, which we were supposedly going in to prevent. Nice job!
October 9th, 2004 — impolite company, the web-wide world
A little more foreign perspective on politics: we Americans don’t have a monopoly on stupidity in government…
Tomas Jogin, a Swedish blogger discusses a proposal in Swedish parliamentfor a new tax on men which he refers to as a Penis tax. The Left Party, formerly the Communist Party, has proposed a special tax just on men which seeks to distribute to all men the costs to society of wife abuse. Because some men abuse their wives, all men are guilty.
Stupid idea. Stupider still that it’s being debated and taken seriously at all. Even more incredible is that it is being put forth as a means to further gender equality. Almost seems Orwellian (Bush-ian) in it’s black-is-white refutation of logic. Almost makes the “Healthy Forests” initiative seem reasonable.
Now, I’m the furthest thing from an expert in Swedish politics — hell, I wouldn’t even call myself an expert in American politics. But in his outrage at the Left Party, I think Tomas goes a little overboard. Because the Left Party is in coalition with the Social Democrat party, Tomas says
All my life, I’ve voted for the Social Democrats, who share some values and collaborate to some degree with the Left Party. I will never again vote for any party which collaborates with the Left Party, to any degree what-so-ever.
[Emphasis in the original]
He may be signalling his hyperbole with his italicization of “some”, but I get the feeling he is serious in applying a collective guilt to the Social Democrats because one of their allies is insane. What are the alternatives? What erosion of the liberties and benefits of being in one of the most socially progressive countries will occur if people like him remove their support because of some nonsensical issue. It reminds me of the people I know who claimed in 2000 that there was no difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, so they voted for Ralph Nader. Turns out there was a difference and we’re all paying for it. Tomas, don’t make that mistake!
October 6th, 2004 — groupmind, impolite company
Guy’s definitely younger, but sexier? I guess there are some who find a certain attraction to bald heads, but…
Honestly, I’m way excited that Guy has asked to join in on this somewhat moribund site. While he and I have discussed politics for years, I’m looking forward to reading his outsider’s commentary on this most important of elections. I know its a cliché, but with the world becoming smaller, there seems to be no such thing as purely national elections. The US casts such an overbearing shadow on world events, that our domestic politics are of equal importance to Europeans, Middle Easterners, Africans and Asians.
Of course, that influence is still very one-sided. The front page of the Guardian newspaper in the UK has a story on the US Vice-Presidential debates last night, but our paper of record, the New York Times, says nothing of British PM Tony Blair’s historic visit to Sudan, where he may have actually made some progress in alleviating the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.
And Guy’s presence is already having an effect on me: I’ve made my first post since July. There’s nothing like the thought of not having my opinions voiced to motivate me!
