Stick This in Your Hurricane Box! I Dare You

CENTCOM has its own page dedicated to hurricane preparedness and suggests that you stick the following items in your 'Hurricane Box':

Hurricance Box: A suggested list of hurricane box contents is below:

Canned and non-perishable foods
Water - at least 1 gallon daily per person for 3 to 7 days
Cooking tools (ie. A non-electric can opener.)
Camp stove (with fuel)
Lantern (with fuel)
Several flashlights and fresh batteries.
A portable, battery operated radio and fresh batteries.
Cell phone.
Zip-lock bags to protect valuables.
A portable cooler and ice.
Baby food, formula, diapers, and baby wipes.
Toiletries.
Eating utensils.
Masking tape.
Bedding, blankets or sleeping bags.
Valuables and important papers (ie.. insurance, medical records, bank account numbers, Social Security card, etc.) in waterproof containers, including your directorate recall list.
Plastic drop cloth.
A few games and books for children.
Iodine or other water purification tablets.
Candles and matches.
Radio - Battery operated with NOAA Weather Radio
Blankets / Pillows, etc.
Clothing - seasonal / rain gear/ sturdy shoes
First Aid Kit / Medicines / Prescription Drugs
Special Items - for babies and the elderly
Toiletries / Hygiene items / Moisture wipes
Keys
Important documents - in a waterproof container
Vehicle fuel tanks filled
Pet care items (proper identification/immunization records/medications), ample supply of food and water, a carrier or cage, muzzle and leash
Canned sodas
Plastic garbage bags
Mosquito repellent
Bleach
Pet food
Bedding (1 blanket or sleeping bag per person)
Cooler
Ice
Toiletries
Clean clothes and sturdy shoes
Clothes & dish detergent
Clothesline and pins
Fire extinguisher - ABC type
Gloves & goggles
Small tools
Cleaning supplies
Brooms & mops
Pails and buckets
Ladders
Plywood & nails
Rakes & shovels
Chain saw, gas & oil
Duct and masking tape
Rolls of plastic
Wheelbarrow
Battery operated clock
Butane lighter or matches
Axes, hatchets, pruners
Rope

CENTCOM, regretfully, does not tell you where to get the absolutely enormous 'box' that would actually hold all of this stuff though. For that, you're on your own.

If you do manage to find such a huge box, pack paddles too. In the event of a levee break, empty the box and row for your life!

Justifying Massacres

In Washington, a senior U.S. military officer said in a video teleconference with reporters at the Pentagon that commanders realize that troops involved in counterinsurgency operations "could snap" in the face of severe pressures.

"When you're in a combat theater dealing with enemy combatants who don't abide by the law of war, who do acts of indecency, soldiers become stressed, they become fearful," said Brig. Gen. Donald Campbell, the chief of staff at the top U.S. military headquarters in Baghdad. "It's very difficult to determine in some cases on this battlefield who is a combatant and who is a civilian.

"It doesn't excuse the acts that have occurred, and we're going to look into them," he added. "But I would say it's stress, fear, isolation and, in some cases, they're just upset. They see their buddies getting blown up on occasion, and they could snap."
link

I can't tell how how incredibly angry it makes me to read these rationalizations of what allegedly happened in Iraq.

Who the fuck 'snaps' and then kills babies - supposedly mistaking them for enemy combatants?

And the US military thinks it can cure this kind of behaviour with "ethics" training? Are you kidding me? You would never hear Americans say the same of an alleged mass murderer in the United States. Timothy McVeigh? Oh, he just snapped. Ted Bundy? Yup, he snapped too. Maybe they should have been given ethics training too.

Let's get real here.

Friday Ramblings

I've had a cold since Tuesday so I haven't been posting as much as usual but I have a few opinions on happenings this week that I wanted to get out there before the weekend comes.

First of all, I had to opt out of the blogger conference call with Liberal leadership candidate Stephane Dion because I was hacking up a storm (coughing, that is). It would have been rude of me to sputter my way through it. So, if any of you who did participate want to share your experience with Mr Dion, please do so. (Did you find out who Mondach Stephanos is?)

Secondly, and I say this in all seriousness: has Foreign Affairs minister Peter Mackay lost his flipping mind?

Liberal Senator Larry Campbell, a former Mountie and Vancouver coroner, asked Mr. MacKay a simple question, "Are we at war?"

Mr. MacKay did not respond directly, saying instead, "We are part of a global effort to confront and defeat terrorism."
link

And, it's not just Mackay who appears to be on some sort of happy hallucinogens:

OTTAWA (CP) - Canada is not at war in Afghanistan, says Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor.

Oh, I know there are some of you out there who will say that no one's really at war with Afghanistan and that you'll want to pretty it up with fancy descriptors but you forget one thing: Bush said after 9/11 that war had been declared by the US's enemies. Ergo, when he and his neocons went into Afghanistan, they believed they were at war. Then they created this faux war on terrorism (which will never be won) and Canada jumped right in to help. So, Canada isn't at war? Well, isn't that a convenient way to flush the Geneva Conventions right down the toilet.

Stick a fork in Liberal leadership candidate Joe Volpe. He's done. And, if you are a Liberal party member who still supports him, you need to ask yourself why you would back someone who's beholden to a drug firm. While we're at it, let's root out all corporate donors to the Liberal party.

Alberta pharmacists have been given the right to prescribe drugs in certain cases. That would be fine if they were actually doctors who could diagnose the real problem before handing out drugs. This is one very dangerous move.

This could be the beginning of the end of US troops in Iraq:

BAGHDAD, Iraq, June 1 — Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki lashed out at the American military on Thursday, denouncing what he characterized as habitual attacks by troops against Iraqi civilians.

If the Iraqi government is under enough pressure by its people, it may just demand a withdrawal of US troops far sooner than Bush had planned. It is, after all, their country.

PM Stephen Harper (aka Bush's new sock-puppet) has decided that a free vote will be held on same sex marriage this fall. The US congress is currently considering a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage. Coincidence? I think not. As for the free vote aspect, you can expect all Conservatives to vote in lock step with their Dear Father on this one. Why are Conservatives so afraid of gay people? I might write something later about why I don't like Conservatives in general. Stay tuned.

Presenteeism, a damaging growing trend.

Ummm...Reuters? What the heck are 'atom talks'?

Abu Ghraib Dog Handler: NO Jail Time

Sgt Santos Cardona was found guilty of 2 of 9 charges on Thursday related to his use of dogs against Abu Ghraib prisoners. On Friday, a military court sentenced him to '90 days' hard labour'.

Cardona's lawyer civilian lawyer, Harvey Volzer, was clearly pleased with the sentence.

"It wasn't an acquittal but it was pretty darn good," the Associated Press quoted him as saying.

I'll bet Cardona's victims don't think this sentence is 'pretty darn good'.

Hans Blix Calls for Nuclear Consistency

While the world and the west are focused on Iran's nuclear capbilities, former UN weapons inspector Hans blix threw out a curveball to Israel on Thursday, which is suspected of having approximately 200 nuclear weapons:

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Iran and Israel should both end nuclear enrichment as part of a renewed drive to rid the Middle East of weapons of mass destruction, a panel led by former U.N. arms inspector Hans Blix said on Thursday.
[...]
The report could embarrass Israel, which has never admitted having nuclear arms and, unlike Iran, is not a member of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

And, on nuclear testing:

The Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission also recommended adopting a treaty banning nuclear testing by all nuclear powers that have not already done so, including the United States, China, India and Pakistan.

"The reality is that if the U.S. were to ratify, then China would. If China did, India would. If India did, Pakistan would. If Pakistan did, then Iran would. It would set in motion a good domino effect," Blix told a news conference.

The recommendations were among 60 offered by the panel, set up by Sweden's government three years ago to pump new life into global disarmament efforts and help free the world of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

Of course, as long as Bush is in power or, frankly, as long as a US administration that is beholden to the military industrial complex still exists, the ban on testing will remain a pipe dream.

Another Iraqi Massacre by the US Military?

The BBC reports that it has reviewed videotape from an incident that occured in Ishaqi, Iraq in March, 2006.

The video appears to challenge the US military's account of events that took place in the town of Ishaqi in March.

The US said at the time four people died during a military operation, but Iraqi police claimed that US troops had deliberately shot the 11 people.

A spokesman for US forces in Iraq told the BBC an inquiry was under way.

[...]

The US authorities said they were involved in a firefight after a tip-off that an al-Qaeda supporter was visiting the house.

According to the Americans, the building collapsed under heavy fire killing four people - a suspect, two women and a child.

But a report filed by Iraqi police accused US troops of rounding up and deliberately shooting 11 people in the house, including five children and four women, before blowing up the building.

The video tape obtained by the BBC shows a number of dead adults and children at the site with what our world affairs editor John Simpson says were clearly gunshot wounds.

Another Haditha?

Abu Ghraib Dog Handler Found Guilty

Military dog handler, Sgt. Santos A. Cardona, has been found guilty of two of nine possible charges related to his treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib.

His sentence? The maximum he now faces is a ridiculous 3 years in jail. 3 years. For terrorizing people with dogs.

What message does that send first of all to his victims and secondly to others in the military who might be considering circumventing the law?

Carrots and Sticks for Iran

The major world powers have reached an agreement on a package of incentives to be presented to Iran - along with the threat of sanctions if they do not comply.

There had been some concern that Russia and/or China would not agree to any punitive measures against Iran becuase of their oil and technology ties but, until we're able to see the actual details of this proposal, we won't be sure how influential those two countries were in perhaps softening any penalties.

Sanctions could entail visa bans and a freeze on assets of senior Iranian officials before resorting to trade measures, they said.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who announced the offer of talks on Wednesday, said a last-resort military option, should talks or sanctions prove futile, remained on the table.

But Washington, angling for firm Russian support, had accepted language in a proposed Security Council resolution to underpin the offer that would rule out an immediate threat of military strikes on Tehran, U.S. and European officials said.

That ought to have been a no-brainer, since the IAEA's ElBaradei announced that Iran was not an 'imminent nuclear threat' earlier this week. This is no logical reason for a militray strike on Iran at this point. But, as I've written before, that won't necessarily stop Bush from attacking anyway. He would just do it without UN approval.

Who's Really Playing Politics With Haditha?

The deaths of 24 men, women and children in the Iraqi town of Haditha have garnered front page headlines in the press recently since word has spread that some of the marines involved might be charged with crimes including murder. The reaction by any normal, rational person would be to wait for the results of the investigation while mourning for the dead. There is absolutely nothing political about this situation - unless you're an angry right-winger.

Jed Babbin, deputy undersecretary of defense for Bush's father, warns his colleagues that the antiwar left is going to use the alleged massacre for political aims. What Babbin fails to understand is that the antiwar left, of which I am a part of, was opposed to the war in the first place. We don't need horrific incidents like this and the torture at Abu Ghraib to prove that this war was illegal and unecessary. We knew it before there were any bombs or boots on the ground.

The idea that anyone on the left would use the deaths of these innocent civilians for political gain is unscrupulous. The only ones who seem to be doing that at this point are right-wingers like Babbin who will use any opportunity they can to attack the antiwar crowd. Why? Because we were right and Babbin and his ilk were so incredibly wrong and they absolutely refuse to take responsibility for that fact.

Does he honestly think we care if Bush ever admits he was wrong about this war? Clue to Babbin: we don't need him to. The world has already woken up to that fact. Bush never will. His legacy is at stake and he truly believes he's on some special mission from God. There's no way he can repent now. His head would explode.

Babbin, of course, ends his article with the 'bad apples' argument. We know these marines are not representative of the entire marine corps, but we also know that the Bush administration through its repeated deployments and policy of sending mentally ill soldiers back into the war zone must bear some responsibility as well. The complete lack of willingness by the right-wing to hold their leaders accountable for the decisions made throughout this war indicates a complicity in whatever happens overseas. No man is so sacred that he cannot or should not be held to account. Yet, Bush supporters fail to see that by not questioning their leader and his policies, they are continually allowing atrocities and injustices to occur.

What is so incredibly special about Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney that they should escape scrutiny? I'd like to see a right-winger answer that question honestly for a change instead of attacking those of us on the left who only want two things: truth and justice.

Insert Your Own Caption...

"Helen Thomas! You get back here. I'm not done with you yet!"

(photo credit: Yuri Gripas/Reuters)