It's Official: Top Catholic Leaders Are Attacking Evolution

by Michael in New York - 7/09/2005 05:00:00 AM

Good lord, the sky really is falling for American Catholics who have to deal with officials that protect child molesters, belittle and marginalize the victims, demand that government officials elected to represent all citizens deny basic rights to those it deems unfit and on and on. The latest (pointed to us by threader An Other Greek)? The NYT confirms that the Op-Ed we linked to yesterday attacking science and reason was no fluke or misunderstanding: the cardinal who penned it spoke to Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict) and got the go-ahead to "correct" the decades-long stance of the Church which was to stay out of science since it had made a fool of itself in that area for so long that it undercut the Church's authority on moral issues.

Not only was the article a direct assault on evolution, it was done in cooperation with the very group that wants to shove its own religious beliefs of Creationism aka Intelligent Design into the public schools, the very fundamentalist Christians who hate Catholics. I keep saying fundamentalist Christians hate Catholicism and it's been true for ages, but the Catholics in charge seem to be their cup of tea.

This sort of cooperation is going to have serious repercussions in the public sphere down the road, assuming you don't already think the politicking that cost Kerry the Catholic vote hasn't already dramatically affected this country. The fights in public schools to teach science in science class just got a lot fiercer.

Cardinal Schönborn, who is on the Vatican's Congregation for Catholic Education, said the office had no plans to issue new guidance to teachers in Catholic schools on evolution. But he said he believed students in Catholic schools, and all schools, should be taught that evolution is just one of many theories. Many Catholic schools teach Darwinian evolution, in which accidental mutation and natural selection of the fittest organisms drive the history of life, as part of their science curriculum.

Darwinian evolution is the foundation of modern biology. While researchers may debate details of how the mechanism of evolution plays out, there is no credible scientific challenge to the underlying theory.

Finding Design in Nature

By CHRISTOPH SCHÖNBORN

Vienna

EVER since 1996, when Pope John Paul II said that evolution (a term he did not define) was "more than just a hypothesis," defenders of neo-Darwinian dogma have often invoked the supposed acceptance - or at least acquiescence - of the Roman Catholic Church when they defend their theory as somehow compatible with Christian faith.

But this is not true. The Catholic Church, while leaving to science many details about the history of life on earth, proclaims that by the light of reason the human intellect can readily and clearly discern purpose and design in the natural world, including the world of living things.

Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection - is not. Any system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence for design in biology is ideology, not science.

Consider the real teaching of our beloved John Paul. While his rather vague and unimportant 1996 letter about evolution is always and everywhere cited, we see no one discussing these comments from a 1985 general audience that represents his robust teaching on nature:

"All the observations concerning the development of life lead to a similar conclusion. The evolution of living beings, of which science seeks to determine the stages and to discern the mechanism, presents an internal finality which arouses admiration. This finality which directs beings in a direction for which they are not responsible or in charge, obliges one to suppose a Mind which is its inventor, its creator."

He went on: "To all these indications of the existence of God the Creator, some oppose the power of chance or of the proper mechanisms of matter. To speak of chance for a universe which presents such a complex organization in its elements and such marvelous finality in its life would be equivalent to giving up the search for an explanation of the world as it appears to us. In fact, this would be equivalent to admitting effects without a cause. It would be to abdicate human intelligence, which would thus refuse to think and to seek a solution for its problems."

Note that in this quotation the word "finality" is a philosophical term synonymous with final cause, purpose or design. In comments at another general audience a year later, John Paul concludes, "It is clear that the truth of faith about creation is radically opposed to the theories of materialistic philosophy. These view the cosmos as the result of an evolution of matter reducible to pure chance and necessity."

Naturally, the authoritative Catechism of the Catholic Church agrees: "Human intelligence is surely already capable of finding a response to the question of origins. The existence of God the Creator can be known with certainty through his works, by the light of human reason." It adds: "We believe that God created the world according to his wisdom. It is not the product of any necessity whatever, nor of blind fate or chance."

In an unfortunate new twist on this old controversy, neo-Darwinists recently have sought to portray our new pope, Benedict XVI, as a satisfied evolutionist. They have quoted a sentence about common ancestry from a 2004 document of the International Theological Commission, pointed out that Benedict was at the time head of the commission, and concluded that the Catholic Church has no problem with the notion of "evolution" as used by mainstream biologists - that is, synonymous with neo-Darwinism.

The commission's document, however, reaffirms the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church about the reality of design in nature. Commenting on the widespread abuse of John Paul's 1996 letter on evolution, the commission cautions that "the letter cannot be read as a blanket approbation of all theories of evolution, including those of a neo-Darwinian provenance which explicitly deny to divine providence any truly causal role in the development of life in the universe."

Furthermore, according to the commission, "An unguided evolutionary process - one that falls outside the bounds of divine providence - simply cannot exist."

Indeed, in the homily at his installation just a few weeks ago, Benedict proclaimed: "We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Throughout history the church has defended the truths of faith given by Jesus Christ. But in the modern era, the Catholic Church is in the odd position of standing in firm defense of reason as well. In the 19th century, the First Vatican Council taught a world newly enthralled by the "death of God" that by the use of reason alone mankind could come to know the reality of the Uncaused Cause, the First Mover, the God of the philosophers.

Now at the beginning of the 21st century, faced with scientific claims like neo-Darwinism and the multiverse hypothesis in cosmology invented to avoid the overwhelming evidence for purpose and design found in modern science, the Catholic Church will again defend human reason by proclaiming that the immanent design evident in nature is real. Scientific theories that try to explain away the appearance of design as the result of "chance and necessity" are not scientific at all, but, as John Paul put it, an abdication of human intelligence.

Christoph Schönborn, the Roman Catholic cardinal archbishop of Vienna, was the lead editor of the official 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Leading Cardinal Redefines Church's View on Evolution

By CORNELIA DEAN and LAURIE GOODSTEIN

An influential cardinal in the Roman Catholic Church, which has long been regarded as an ally of the theory of evolution, is now suggesting that belief in evolution as accepted by science today may be incompatible with Catholic faith.

The cardinal, Christoph Schönborn, archbishop of Vienna, a theologian who is close to Pope Benedict XVI, staked out his position in an Op-Ed article in The New York Times on Thursday, writing, "Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection - is not."

In a telephone interview from a monastery in Austria, where he was on retreat, the cardinal said that his essay had not been approved by the Vatican, but that two or three weeks before Pope Benedict XVI's election in April, he spoke with the pope, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, about the church's position on evolution. "I said I would like to have a more explicit statement about that, and he encouraged me to go on," said Cardinal Schönborn.

He said that he had been "angry" for years about writers and theologians, many Catholics, who he said had "misrepresented" the church's position as endorsing the idea of evolution as a random process.

Opponents of Darwinian evolution said they were gratified by Cardinal Schönborn's essay. But scientists and science teachers reacted with confusion, dismay and even anger. Some said they feared the cardinal's sentiments would cause religious scientists to question their faiths.

Cardinal Schönborn, who is on the Vatican's Congregation for Catholic Education, said the office had no plans to issue new guidance to teachers in Catholic schools on evolution. But he said he believed students in Catholic schools, and all schools, should be taught that evolution is just one of many theories. Many Catholic schools teach Darwinian evolution, in which accidental mutation and natural selection of the fittest organisms drive the history of life, as part of their science curriculum.

Darwinian evolution is the foundation of modern biology. While researchers may debate details of how the mechanism of evolution plays out, there is no credible scientific challenge to the underlying theory.

American Catholics and conservative evangelical Christians have been a potent united front in opposing abortion, stem cell research and euthanasia, but had parted company on the death penalty and the teaching of evolution. Cardinal Schönborn's essay and comments are an indication that the church may now enter the debate over evolution more forcefully on the side of those who oppose the teaching of evolution alone.

One of the strongest advocates of teaching alternatives to evolution is the Discovery Institute in Seattle, which promotes the idea, termed intelligent design, that the variety and complexity of life on earth cannot be explained except through the intervention of a designer of some sort.

Mark Ryland, a vice president of the institute, said in an interview that he had urged the cardinal to write the essay. Both Mr. Ryland and Cardinal Schönborn said that an essay in May in The Times about the compatibility of religion and evolutionary theory by Lawrence M. Krauss, a physicist at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, suggested to them that it was time to clarify the church's position on evolution.

The cardinal's essay, a direct response to Dr. Krauss's article, was submitted to The Times by a Virginia public relations firm, Creative Response Concepts, which also represents the Discovery Institute.

Mr. Ryland, who said he knew the cardinal through the International Theological Institute in Gaming, Austria, where he is chancellor and Mr. Ryland is on the board, said supporters of intelligent design were "very excited" that a church leader had taken a position opposing Darwinian evolution. "It clarified that in some sense the Catholics aren't fine with it," he said.

Bruce Chapman, the institute's president, said the cardinal's essay "helps blunt the claims" that the church "has spoken on Darwinian evolution in a way that's supportive."

But some biologists and others said they read the essay as abandoning longstanding church support for evolutionary biology.

"How did the Discovery Institute talking points wind up in Vienna?" wondered Glenn Branch, deputy director of the National Center for Science Education, which advocates the teaching of evolution. "It really did look quite a bit as if Cardinal Schönborn had been reading their Web pages."

Mr. Ryland said the cardinal was well versed on these issues and had written the essay on his own.

Dr. Francis Collins, who headed the official American effort to decipher the human genome, and who describes himself as a Christian, though not a Catholic, said Cardinal Schönborn's essay looked like "a step in the wrong direction" and said he feared that it "may represent some backpedaling from what scientifically is a very compelling conclusion, especially now that we have the ability to study DNA."

"There is a deep and growing chasm between the scientific and the spiritual world views," he went on. "To the extent that the cardinal's essay makes believing scientists less and less comfortable inhabiting the middle ground, it is unfortunate. It makes me uneasy."

"Unguided," "unplanned," "random" and "natural" are all adjectives that biologists might apply to the process of evolution, said Dr. Kenneth R. Miller, a professor of biology at Brown and a Catholic. But even so, he said, evolution "can fall within God's providential plan." He added: "Science cannot rule it out. Science cannot speak on this."

Dr. Miller, whose book "Finding Darwin's God" describes his reconciliation of evolutionary theory with Christian faith, said the essay seemed to equate belief in evolution with disbelief in God. That is alarming, he said. "It may have the effect of convincing Catholics that evolution is something they should reject."

Dr. Collins and other scientists said they could understand why a cleric might want to make the case that, as Dr. Collins put it, "evolution is the mechanism by which human beings came into existence, but God had something to do with that, too." Dr. Collins said that view, theistic evolution, "is shared with a very large number of biologists who also believe in God, including me."

But it does not encompass the idea that the workings of evolution required the direct intervention of a supernatural agent, as intelligent design would have it.

In his essay, Cardinal Schönborn asserted that he was not trying to break new ground but to correct the idea, "often invoked," that the church accepts or at least acquiesces to the theory of evolution.

He referred to widely cited remarks by Pope John Paul II, who, in a 1996 address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, noted that the scientific case for evolution was growing stronger and that the theory was "more than a hypothesis."

In December, Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo, chairman of the Committee on Science and Human Values of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, cited those remarks in writing to the nation's bishops that "the Church does not need to fear the teaching of evolution as long as it is understood as a scientific account of the physical origins and development of the universe." But in his essay, Cardinal Schönborn dismissed John Paul's statement as "rather vague and unimportant."

Francisco Ayala, a professor of biology at the University of California, Irvine, and a former Dominican priest, called this assessment "an insult" to the late pope and said the cardinal seemed to be drawing a line between the theory of evolution and religious faith, and "seeing a conflict that does not exist."

Dr. Miller said he was already hearing from people worried about the cardinal's essay. "People are saying, does the church really believe this?" He said he would not speculate. "John Paul II made it very clear that he regarded scientific rationality as a gift from God," Dr. Miller said, adding, "There are more than 100 cardinals and they often have conflicting opinions."

Like sheep, like man

450 Sheep Jump to Their Deaths in Turkey

The Associated Press
Friday, July 8, 2005; 9:30 AM

ISTANBUL, Turkey -- First one sheep jumped to its death. Then stunned Turkish shepherds, who had left the herd to graze while they had breakfast, watched as nearly 1,500 others followed, each leaping off the same cliff, Turkish media reported.

In the end, 450 dead animals lay on top of one another in a billowy white pile, the Aksam newspaper said. Those who jumped later were saved as the pile got higher and the fall more cushioned, Aksam reported.

"There's nothing we can do. They're all wasted," Nevzat Bayhan, a member of one of 26 families whose sheep were grazing together in the herd, was quoted as saying by Aksam.

The estimated loss to families in the town of Gevas, located in Van province in eastern Turkey, tops $100,000, a significant amount of money in a country where average GDP per head is around $2,700.

"Every family had an average of 20 sheep," Aksam quoted another villager, Abdullah Hazar as saying. "But now only a few families have sheep left. It's going to be hard for us."

'I thought I was going to die'

Why should the rest of the civilized world have to suffer due to the Jews and their problems. They have caused problems with their neighbors for thousands of years and quite frankly, I am fed up. We should stop all aid to Israel, no more handouts. Let them fight their own wars on Israeli soil. They are a pariah nation just as was Hitler's Germany. Frankly, I don't give a damm what happens to the Jews or their filthy Muslim enemies, they are both human scum.

Accounts from people who witnessed the explosions in central London today

Thursday July 7, 2005

Tube between King's Cross and Russell Square

"I was in a tube at King's Cross when one of the explosions happened. I was stuck in a smoke-filled, blackened tube that reeked of burning for over 30 minutes. So many people were hysterical. I truly thought I was going to die and was just hoping it would be from smoke inhalation and not fire. I felt genuine fear but kept calm.

Eventually people smashed through the windows and we were lifted out all walked up the tunnel to the station. There was chaos outside and I started to walk down Euston Road (my face and clothes were black) towards work and all of a sudden there was another huge bang and people started running up the road in the opposite direction to where I was walking and screaming and crying. I now realise this must have been one of the buses exploding."
Jo Herbert

"Everything was normal. Suddenly there was a massive bang, the train jolted. There was immediately smoke everywhere and it was hot and everybody panicked. People started screaming and crying."
BBC worker, Jacqui Head, who was on a Piccadilly Line train at King's Cross

"I was on the southbound Piccadilly line, between King's Cross and Russell Square this morning, when the incident occurred. At just after nine, there was an almighty bang and the train came to a sudden stop. The lights in the carriage went out and the air became thick with dust and soot ... We left the train within around half an hour. I feel very lucky."
John Sandy

"I was on a Piccadilly line tube train in between King's Cross and Russell Square, about 8.45 this morning. There was a sudden explosion, the train stopped immediately in the middle of the tunnel and the power went out. The explosion didn't sound like a bomb, more a loud power surge - but almost straight away our packed carriage started to fill with smoke, and people panicked immediately.

"We walked down the tunnel to the platform at King's Cross and climbed up. We had no idea at this point that it was anything other than an isolated accident, but it was terrifying nonetheless. No one was really control at the station exit - we all just wandered out onto the street as we could."
Richard South

Russell Square and Tavistock Square

"I was on the bus in front and heard an incredible bang, I turned round and half the double-decker bus was in the air ... It was a massive explosion and there were papers and half a bus flying through the air, I think it was the number 205. There must be a lot of people dead as all the buses were packed, they had been turning people away from the tube stops. We were about 20 metres away, that was all."
Belinda Seabrook, who was on a bus travelling from Euston to Russell Square, London

"As I was heading toward Euston I heard a bang behind me, turning round I saw a huge cloud of smoke and what looked like a truck that was mangled and twisted somehow. I knew straight away that it was a bomb. "Everyone started running and screaming. I did the same and just tried to get away."
John Kelly

"People were running this way, panicked. They knew it was a bomb. Debris flying all over, mostly glass."
Jay Kumar, owner of a newsagent near the bus blast in Russell Square

"The explosion seemed to be at the back of the bus. The roof flew off and went up about 10 metres. It then floated back down. I shouted at the passengers to get off the bus. They went into Tavistock Park nearby. There were obviously people badly injured. A parking attendant said he thought a piece of human flesh had landed on his arm."
Raj Mattoo, 35, who was standing on a street corner near Tavistock Square

"I was walking along. There was a whole crowd of people around the bus. The next thing I knew I was on the floor. There was shedloads of glass raining down. Someone fell on me and someone fell on him. For a moment I thought I was going to be trampled. I picked myself up and everyone was running. There was glass everywhere. We ran into a building and a security guard was saying 'get in, get in'. Then the security guard said 'get out' which was a bit scary." (When asked about the possibility of a terrorist attack): "I saw the bus ripped out at the back ... it couldn't have been anything else."
Unnamed eyewitness in Tavistock Place area

"I have been in the military and I've never heard anything like it before. But the whole incident was screened by trees in front of the hotel which maybe protected us from any blast."
Chris Gladysz, hotel worker, Tavistock hotel

"There was a big blast followed by the sound of people screaming. I rushed to the window and it was just unbelievable. From what I saw the top half of the bus had been blown off. And people were wandering around in a daze."
Unnamed woman, Tavistock Square

"I was coming out of a café and turned round and saw a massive explosion from the middle of the road. I was certain it was the bus. My first instinct was to run."
Eyewitness Richard Routledge

Tube at Aldgate

"I got off the train, walked off about five paces. There was a huge, I mean a huge, explosion which appeared to come from the back end of the train or the tunnel. Everybody just froze - what the hell's going on? Then everybody walked out of the station quite calmly ... There was no pushing. I went upstairs and got out. It was then you think how lucky you are."
Michael Searle, had just got off a Circle Line train from Victoria to Liverpool Street

"I was on the train and there was a sudden jolt forward ... There was a really hard banging from the carriage next door to us after the explosion - that's where it happened. There was a fire beside me. I saw flames outside on the window of my carriage ... I saw bodies. I think some people may have died."
Sarah Reid, at Aldgate

Tube at Edgware Road

"All of sudden there was this massive huge bang. It was absolutely deafening and all the windows shattered. The glass did not actually fall out of the windows, it just cracked. The train came to a grinding halt, everyone fell off their seats. You couldn't really breathe and you couldn't see what was happening. The driver came on the Tannoy and said 'We have got a problem, don't panic'. You could see the carriage opposite was completely gutted. There were some people in real trouble."
Simon Corvett, 26, from Oxford, on eastbound train from Edgware Road tube

"There were two tubes crossing in different directions. As it [the other train] got to our carriage it exploded. It was a massive explosion and immediately everything filled up with smoke. People were screaming, as you'd expect, in that situation. I saw one lady who was ripped to pieces, lying between the two trains. People were trying to help her."
Carol Miller, 35

"People were screaming out, there was debris everywhere. We were trying to open doors to let in air but we couldn't. It was the most horrendous thing I've seen in my life."
Lauren Shorter, 21

Take America. Add France. Enjoy.

Québec City. The vacation destination you may be tempted to keep to yourself.

Read More...

I despise Religion!

I despise fundamentalist Jews, Christians, Muslims and all fundamentalist believers of any religion. Are these people insane? George Bush and Bin Laden are equally dangerous to the world. People are indeed, stupid.

Blair Vows Terrorism Will Be Defeated Following London Blasts

By Michael Drudge Gleneagles, Scotland 07 July 2005

British Prime Minister Tony Blair

British Prime Minister Tony Blair says the apparent terrorist attacks in London were timed to coincide with the Group of Eight summit in Scotland.

Mr. Blair says the attacks that rocked London's transport system are particularly barbaric since they came when world leaders are trying to focus on combating poverty in Africa and the effects of climate change.

The prime minister said he will rush back to London to assess the situation, but the summit meeting will continue.

And he vows that terrorism will be defeated.

"It is important that those engaged in terrorism realize that our determination to defend our values and our way of life is greater than their determination to cause death and destruction to innocent people in a desire to impose extremism on the world," he said.

Mr. Blair said his sentiments are shared by the other G-8 leaders.

Neanderthal Genome May Be Reconstructed

Wed Jul 6,10:49 AM ET

German and U.S. scientists have launched a project to reconstruct the Neanderthal genome, the Max-Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology said Wednesday.

The project, which involves isolating genetic fragments from fossils of the prehistoric beings who originally inhabited Europe, is being carried out at the Leipzig-based institute.

"The project is very new and is just at its beginning," said Sandra Jacob, a spokeswoman for the institute.

U.S. geneticist Edward Rubin, from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in Berkeley, Calif., is also participating in the project.

In an interview with the German weekly Die Zeit, Rubin said the research would amount to more than just a spectacular display of science.

"Firstly, we will learn a lot about the Neanderthals. Secondly, we will learn a lot about the uniqueness of human beings. And thirdly, it's simply cool," Rubin said.

Neanderthals were replaced by modern humans in Europe only between 40,000 and 30,000 years ago.

Israel refuses to extradite alleged war criminal

Germany should simply send troops to Israel so as to apprehend this heathen and place him on trial for crimes against humanity.

6 July 2005

WARSAW - Israel has refused a Polish request for the extradition of Solomon Morel, 87, alleged to have committed crimes against humanity as the head of a labour camp holding ethnic Germans in Poland's southern Silesian region immediately after World War II, Poland's Rzeczpospolita daily reported Wednesday.

Poland made its second request to Israel for the Israeli citizens extradition on a charge of genocide in April 2004, after an earlier request was refused in 1998.

Justice Minister Andrzej Kalwas said Wednesday Poland would forward no further extradition requests for Morel to Israel.

"Unfortunately I must say that there is no legal chance for this extradition," Kalwas
told the Polish PAP news agency.

Poland's Institute of National Remembrance (IPN) war crimes authority suspects Morel is responsible for the death of some 1,538 ethnic Silesians and Germans held at the Swietochlowice concentration camp between February and November 1945.

Morel served as its commander immediately following the defeat of Nazi Germany. Some of the prisoners had Nazi connections.

Eye-witness evidence collected during a lengthy IPN investigation suggested Morel used both psychological and physical torture against the nearly 6,000 inmates at the camp, including beatings and starvation. He is also alleged to have allowed the spread of deadly infectious diseases in the camp.

"There is no basis to accuse Morel of the crime of genocide or crimes against the Polish nation. He and his family are survivors of genocide, the obvious victims of genocide committed by the Nazis and their Polish collaborators," reads an official statement from Israel's Justice Ministry.

Morel fled Poland to Israel in 1992 after Polish justice authorities launched a criminal investigation against him. In 1998, Israel refused to honour an earlier extradition request, also claiming it had not been presented with evidence of Morel's alleged involvement in war crimes.

According to the Rzeczpospolita report, Israel believed that the camp held 60 inmates and emphasises Morel's wartime experience as a Polish Jew targeted for death by Nazi Germany. Morel's parents and siblings did not survive.

Israel also alleged the Polish request was made "against a Jewish citizen" after 1989 by "a few Germans" after 1989 "during a period of growing anti-Semitism".

Israel's Justice Ministry also underscored the fact that "thousands" of Jewish survivors were killed in Poland in the immediate post-war period and claims that many suspects escaped justice.

	Source: www.arcticbeacon.citymaker.com

Mom, Who Lost Son In Iraq, Talks About 'Disgusting' White House Private Meeting With Bush; Claims He Was Arrogant, 'Totally Detached From Humanity' And Didn't Even Know Her Name

Founder of peace group to stop senseless murder of our children, Cindy Sheehan wants parents to 'wake up' to the illegal nature of the war and Bush's corrupt motives meriting impeachment. She tells parents to advise their children not to fight, saying it's better 'to spend a year in jail instead of an eternity in a coffin.'
July 5, 2005

By Greg Szymanski

Cindy Sheehan has already had her heart ripped into a million pieces by the illegal Iraqi war, losing the son she loved more than life itself only five days after he arrived in Baghdad in April 2004.

There is nothing more painful or more heart breaking than a parent losing a child.

And for Sheehan to lose her 24-year-old son, Casey, must have been like someone taking her very own heart and soul and, without warning, ripping them out and throwing them into the depths of hell.

No one should have to experience such pain, but the cold reality of war is that someone’s child actually dies and there are actual parents left living with the hopeless task of trying to cope with the pain.

And anyone with any semblance of a heart and soul knows a mother coping with such a loss needs all the help and understanding she can get.

Anyone with the slightest bit of compassion knows a kind word or a shoulder to cry on helps a mother, who experienced the ultimate loss, get through another day when every day feels like it could be the end of the world.

So when Sheehan received an invitation to meet privately with President Bush at the White House two months after her son died, the least she could have expected was a bit of compassion or a kind word coming from the heart.

But what she encountered was an arrogant man with eyes lacking the slightest bit of compassion, a President totally "detached from humanity" and a man who didn’t even bother to remember her son’s name when they were first introduced.

Instead of a kind gesture or a warm handshake, Sheehan said she immediately got a taste of Bush arrogance when he entered the room and "in a condescending tone and with a disgusting loud Texas accent," said: "Who we’all honorin’ here today?"

"His mouth kept moving, but there was nothing in his eyes or anything else about him that showed me he really cared or had any real compassion at all. This is a human being totally disconnected from humanity and reality. His eyes were empty, hollow shells and he was acting like I should be proud to just be in his presence when it was my son who died for his illegal war! It was one of the most disgusting experiences I ever had and it took me almost a year to even talk about it," said Sheehan in a telephone conversation from Washington D.C. where she was attending a July 4th anti-war rally.

Sheehan said the June 2004 private meeting with the President went from bad to worse to a nightmare when Bush acted like he didn’t even want to know her name. She said Bush kept referring to her as ‘Ma’ or ‘Mom’ while he "put on a phony act," saying things like ‘Mom, I can’t even imagine losing a loved one, a mother or a father or a sister or a brother.’

"The whole meeting was simply bizarre and disgusting, designed to intimidate instead of providing compassion. He didn’t even know our names," said Sheehan. "Finally I got so upset I just looked him in the eye, saying ‘I think you can imagine losing someone. You have two daughters. Imagine losing them?’ After I said that he just looked at me, looked at me with no feeling or caring in his eyes at all."

Sheehan said what really upset her about the meeting is that Bush appeared to become annoyed and even angry at her daughter Carley, 25, who also attended the White House get-together.

"My daughter said to him directly ‘I wish I could bring my loved one back’ and he said something like ‘so do we.’ Later she told me that after he made his remark he gave her one of the filthiest looks she had ever had gotten in her life.

"I just couldn’t believe this was happening. It was so surreal and bizarre. Later I met with some of the other 15or 16 families who were at the White House the same day and, sure enough, they all felt the same way I did.

"It’s interesting that they put us each in separate rooms. I heard this was done to prevent any type of group outburst and since it’s easier to control a situation when people are separated. Looking back, all I can say is that the meeting with Bush was one of the most disgusting experiences in my life.

"And I even asked him: ‘Why did you even bother to bring us here when I didn’t vote for you and don’t support the illegal nature of your war?’ He said it wasn’t political but I know it was just another one of his lies, as he probably wanted to be able to say out on the political stump that he wasn’t afraid to meet with families who lost loved one’s in the war."

Although Sheehan was opposed to the illegal nature of the war from the outset, it wasn’t until January that she began to become politically active.

Besides speaking at rallies and becoming known in Washington for her outspoken criticism of Bush, Sheehan formed a group called Gold Star Families For Peace, joining together families who lost loved ones in an effort to expose the illegal nature of the war and to hasten the return of troops still fighting in Iraq.

Her involvement with the anti-war movement also led her recently to join forces with the After Downing Street movement, a civic, political and activist group seeking to open a Presidential impeachment inquiry based on the release of damaging British intelligence documents showing Bush doctored WMD intelligence reports to justify his war policy.

"Americans need to wake up and we need to put public pressure on our leaders to end this illegal war," said Sheehan, adding that if the public remains passive, recent statements by Donald Rumsfeld that the war may last another 12 years will come true. "We can’t let these people continue to murder our children and also continue murdering innocent Iraqi citizens, now totaling more than 100.000.

"This is an immoral war based on a false premise. Iraq was never an imminent threat and the Downing Street Memo proves Bush went to war for oil, greed and all the wrong reasons.

Commenting on Bush’s recent speech at Ft. Bragg intended to rally America behind an unpopular war, she said:

"He never mentioned the WMD threat and repeatedly brought up 9/11 in an attempt to scare and frighten everyone again. People have characterized the speech in many ways, but if I had to pick a few words, I would say hypocritical, manipulative, condescending, meaningless drivel."

After the speech, Sheehan was unexpectedly invited on the CNN Larry King Show June 28, but expressed concern and outright anger over the fact she was only given 82 seconds to be "the token anti-war peace speaker" in an hour show which essentially contained a pro war message from all the other guests.

In a recent rebuttal article placed on the Internet, expressing her displeasure with some of the CNN guests and the short time given for her anti-war message, she wrote:

"My absolute favorite guest of the evening was Sen. John Warner, powerful chair of the Senate Armed (Disservices) Committee. Of course, he fell in lockstep behind his Führer (Bush) and praised the speech…. I sat in the Green Room with Sen. Warner's entourage. I wondered (even out loud) what price they have paid for our administration's misdeeds in Iraq. They all looked like happy, well-fed, well-dressed, well-educated, and well-hydrated Americans.…I sincerely doubt if any of them had a loved one ripped from their lives by a car bomb, IED, or bullet in an ambush.

"I spoke with John Warner after his interview and told him unless he was prepared to sacrifice even a good night's sleep over this senseless and criminal war, then he should work on ending it, not prolonging the carnage. He told me that I was "entitled to my opinion," but he would respectfully have to disagree with me. That was awfully Constitutional of him!

"I finally got to speak for my 82 seconds (all the time Larry King Live could spare for the peace message) about how this war is a catastrophe and how we should bring the troops home and quit forcing the

Iraqi people to pay for our government's hubris and quit forcing innocent children to suffer so we can allegedly fight terrorism somewhere besides America. How absolutely racist and immoral is it to

take America's battles to another land and make an entire country pay for the crimes of others? To me, this is blatant genocide.

"After my brief advocacy for peace, my position was refuted by another mom whose son was killed in Iraq in 2003, saying she "totally disagrees" with me and "feels sorry" for me.

"Well, you know what? I ache for her blindness and for the millions of ‘sheeple’ who have had the wool pulled over their eyes by this bunch of hypocritical, bad shepherds who are running a disastrous herd over the world. I have distressing news for the ‘Soccer Safety Moms’ and the ‘NASCAR Dads’ who are such ardent supporters of this administration and war:

"Your grandchildren and children who will be entering Kindergarten this fall will be fighting George's endless war if he gets his way and is allowed to continue spreading the cancer of imperialism in the Middle-East….

"Think about it when you tuck your child into bed tonight."

For more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com where donations are accepted to keep the truth and news flowing in the wake of a media blackout.

How the Islamic crazies are like the Right

by kos

Mon Jul 4th, 2005 at 23:47:07 PDT

Funny how the wingers try to claim American liberals are in league with crazy fundamentalist Muslims.

Reality is, we hate everything Islamic fundamentalism stands for. On the other hand, the Dobson's of the Republican Party -- you know, the people running the show -- have far more in common with the enemy than they'd ever like to admit.

Religion in government

Al Qaida/Taliban: One and the same
American Taliban: One and the same
Liberals: Separation of church and state

Schools

Al Qaida/Taliban: Religious indoctrination. Run by clergy.
American Taliban: School prayer. Religious indoctrination (creationism and "intelligent design"). Private religious school system.
Liberals: Leave religious teachings to parents and sunday school.

Women

Al Qaida/Taliban: No school, must cover entire body, no rights
American Taliban: Government control over reproductive freedoms, hostility to Title IX, hostility to working women
Liberals: Equality of the sexes

Religious freedom

Al Qaida/Taliban: 'Think like us, or we'll whiip you and/or chop off your head'
American Taliban: 'Think like us, or we'll condemn you to hell'
Liberals: To each her own

Homosexuality

Al Qaida/Taliban: Eradicate them from society
American Taliban: Eradicate them from society
Liberals: Equality under the law

Torture

Al Qaida/Taliban: Torture them or chop off their heads
American Taliban: Torture them or homosexually rape them.
Liberals: No torture

Medicine and Science

Al Qaida/Taliban: Faith-based world view
American Taliban: Faith-based world view
Liberals: Reality-based community

International Conference Accuses Israel Of Heinous Crimes Against Palestinian Children

An international conference organized by the pro-child world movement, and currently held in Bethlehem city, accused Israel of committing heinous crimes against innocent Palestinian children, describing the policy Israel pursues as a blatant violation of human rights.

Held under the motto "children behind bars", the conference was attended by a several international and local human rights activists, who were unanimous that there is "a social and economic context prompting children towards delinquency".

The attendees highlighted the great importance of adopting specific mechanisms to preserve the children's rights in a way that secures their physical, emotional, and morale stability.

The participants, moreover, noted that the harsh and abusive policy Israel is pursuing against juveniles, including depriving them of their basic rights, would negatively affect their life.

They called for absorbing the youngsters into the society and setting of a specific budget for them, enough to get their basic needs.

Also the brutal Israeli measures exercised against the Palestinian captives were also highlighted at the conference.

Minor inmates held at Israeli detention centers are enduring serious psychological problems.

The participants called on Israel to immediately put an end to its harsh practices against the Palestinian children.

Have Another Slice of Yellowcake, Karl

It looks like the ghost of Valerie Plame's old CIA cover identity may be coming back to haunt her killer -- like the telltale heart in Poe's story. KaWUMP. KaWUMP.

I wouldn't be surprised if Rove is tearing up the floorboards in his office right now, trying to figure out where that maddening sound is coming from. But it may be too late -- Matt Cooper's notebook may have already whispered Rove's secret to Patrick Fitzgerald and his grand jury.

"Give me back my golden arrrrrmm!"

Wait, wrong ghost story.

If this is true, it must be an enormous bummer for the original Mayberry Machiavelli -- like the scene in the Columbo episode (or these days, the Monk episode) where the murderer realizes he or she has not pulled off the perfect crime, because the supposedly bumbling detective is actuallly hot on his or her trail.

But whether Fitzgerald actually is in pursuit of the great white Karl remains unclear. A few months ago, the usual unnamed sources were blowing smoke in the media about the investigation being "almost wrapped up" with only a few niggling loose ends -- like threatening to throw Judy Miller and Matt Cooper in the slammer -- left untied. Indictments, we were told, were not expected, at least not under the statute dealing with the deliberate outing of intelligence operatives.

But, as we all learned from Ken Starr, a special prosecutor armed with a grand jury can roam far and wide in search of big game, and never have to worry about losing his hunting licence. So the last paragraph of this story from the Chicago Tribune -- Fitzgerald's home town paper -- might have caused Rove's triple chin to quiver just a little:

The breadth of Fitzgerald's inquiry has led to speculation that it has evolved into an investigation of a conspiracy to leak Plame's identity, or of an attempt to cover up White House involvement in the leak.

Rove: I did not have quote with that woman.

Now perjury and obstruction of justice are both perfectly good crimes -- not as good as treason, maybe, but still worth a couple of felony convictions. And if that's where Fitzgerald is going with this then I say bon voyage.

But Editor & Publisher accidently added a twist to the plot yesterday when it mistakenly posted a year-old story noting the broad reach of the investigative net cast by the grand jury into the White House cesspool:

The grand jury investigating the leak of the covert CIA operative's name has subpoenaed a wide range of White House documents, including records of telephone calls from Air Force One and information relating to an internal working group dealing with Iraq. (emphasis added)

E&P has since pulled the story back down, but it was a useful reminder that we really have no idea -- outside the self-serving spin of potential prosecutorial targets -- where Fitzgerald and the grand jury are trying to go, or how far along the road they have travelled.

Josh Marshall has noted that a close look at the Plame outing might lead a conscientious investigator to scrutinize some of the issues raised by the story that originally led to the Plame outing -- that is, the report of a wholly mythical effort by Iraq to purchase 500 tons of yellowcake uranium ore from Niger.

It's now known that the yellowcake report originated with the Italian security service, the SISMI (the same lovely people who gave us the "strategy of tension.") Marshall says his own reporting has also traced the forged papers that supposedly documented the Niger story to SISMI -- but no further.

Any number of conspiracy theories have been offered to explain the ultimate origin of those documents. In its own investigation of the WMD snipe hunt, the Senate Whitewashing Committee, er, I mean, the Senate Intelligence Committee, rather studiously avoided the subject, which supposedly was left for the FBI to investigate.

Which naturally raises the question of whether Fitzgerald's team and the FBI have been talking to each other lately, and what they may have been talking about. If there are strands of evidence that tend to walk the responsibility for the production and/or disseminaton of those forged documents back to this side of the Atlantic, and if any of those strands lead towards the U.S. government, or "an internal working group dealing with Iraq" . . . well, Rove (and others) might find that perjury charges are the least of their worries.

Posted by billmon at July 3, 2005 11:59 AM

BUSH MAY BE MANIC

BUSH MAY BE MANIC

PRESIDENTIAL MANIC BEHAVIOR

By Peter Fredson

July 2, 2005


When President Bush pranced before a crowd of captive soldiers last Tuesday at Fort Bragg he swaggered, smirked, gesticulated, glad-handed, grinned, and in many respects acted as though he had swallowed a handful of uppers before coming on-stage. Yet, despite grandiose pronouncements about offering a new strategy, Bush gave the same basic speech he gave many times previously: staying the course, insurgents hating democracy, our brave troops, and setting an exit date from Iraq might give comfort to the enemy.

One must wonder why, on the face of it, there was all this hoopla, all this fervor without substance, this tempest in a broken teapot? Was it because Bush needed to express his emotions at failure after he thought he had been chosen by God Almighty to bring about an apocalypse?

Why all the intense personality display, the pleading, the staged sincerity, the pre-arranged clapping of assembled troops? Was it a prelude to the Ides of March of a Julius Caesar? Or was it a mental disorder?

A blogger from Bellacio suggested that Bush suffers from bipolar disorder, manic-depressive behavior. A glance at medical information reveals the Positive Aspect of manic-depression. Examining a list of possible symptoms the reader might ask if it is possible that George Bush is indeed expressing manic behavior. Here is a culled list of symptoms:

From high to low. From euphoria to depression. From recklessness to listlessness. These are extremes associated with bipolar disorder, which can be a serious and disabling mental illness. Causes are elusive, with no cure. Flare-ups of bipolar disorder may last for weeks or months.

Bipolar disorder is characterized by an alternating pattern of emotional highs (mania) and lows (depression). Intensity of signs and symptoms varies. For many people, manic signs and symptoms may include:


- The "highs" of bipolar disorder
· Increased physical and mental activity and energy
· In the most severe cases, delusions and hallucinations
.
Symptoms
During the manic phase, symptoms can include:
· High level of energy and activity
· Irritable mood
· Decreased need for sleep
· Exaggerated, puffed-up self-esteem
· Rapid or "pressured" speech
· Rapid thoughts
· Tendency to be easily distracted
· Increased recklessness
· Quick to anger
· Impatience with other people
Persecutory delusions.
Delusions of jealousy
· False beliefs (delusions) or false perceptions (hallucinations)
During elated moods, a person may have delusions of grandeur, while irritable moods are often accompanied by paranoid or suspicious feelings.

Manic symptoms may also include:
· overly inflated self-esteem
· decreased need for rest and sleep
· increased distractibility and irritability
· increased physical agitation
· excessive involvement in pleasurable activities that may result in painful consequence; this may include provocative, aggressive, or destructive behavior
· increased talkativeness
· excessive "high" or euphoric feelings
· increased sex drive
· increased energy level
· uncharacteristically poor judgment
· increased denial
Many projects may be started but few are finished
Obsession to finish a single project while other work is neglected
Grandiose ideas with delusions of grandeur
Tendency when speaking for sentences trail off without finishing them
Forget words but may invent new ones
Speech may speed up and become unintelligible
Intense urge to do things, even knowing that they are stupid
Get irritated about the smallest things
Ignoring people and criticism
Denial of any responsibility for acts committed
Talking to oneself
Getting verbally twitchy
Illusions of hearing voices of unseen persons
Irritability, anger, worry, agitation, anxiety
· Excessive irritability, aggressive behavior
· Grandiose delusions, inflated sense of self-importance
· Racing speech, racing thoughts, flight of ideas
· Impulsiveness, poor judgment, distractibility
· Reckless behavior
· In severe cases, delusions and hallucinations
o distractibility (i.e., attention too easily drawn to unimportant or irrelevant external stimuli);
o increase in goal-directed activity (either socially, at work or school, or sexually) or psychomotor agitation;
o more talkative than usual or pressure to keep talking;
o flight of ideas or subjective experience that thoughts are racing;
affective instability"rejection hypersensitivity"dysphoriairritability, intense angeranxiety
Poor concentration is an early symptom of this disorder. A depressed person quickly becomes mentally fatigued when asked to read, study, or solve complicated problems.

Marked forgetfulness often accompanies this disorder. As it worsens, this memory loss can be easily mistaken for early senility (dementia).
Psychomotor retardation manifests as a slowing of coordination, speech, and impaired articulation. A person appears sluggish and seems hesitant or confused in speech and intention.
Mood incongruent themes include delusions of control, persecution, thought broadcasting and thought insertion.

Psychomotor agitation can also lead to generalized restlessness.
Psychomotor activities are the physical gestures that result from mental processes and are a product of the psyche. Many psychomotor behaviors associated with mental disorder affect impulses, cravings, instincts, and wishes. The spectrum of agitated behavior includes: Incoherent conversation, Expansive gesturing, Pacing and hair twirling

Feelings of euphoria, extreme optimism and inflated self-esteem
Rapid speech, racing thoughts, agitation and increased physical activity
Poor judgment
Recklessness or taking chances not normally taken
Extreme irritability

Bipolar disorder may be confused with Psychosis, a major mental disorder in which the personality is disorganized and contact with reality is impaired, often including auditory hallucinations and delusions — firmly held erroneous beliefs.

Of course it may all be coincidence, imagination, or wishful thinking, but our petulant and arrogant leader, who talks to God and has grandiose illusions, who often makes unintelligible remarks, is extremely impatient, and denies all responsibility for his acts, seems to match many of the symptoms listed.

The alternate choice, Dick Cheney, is even worse. May God, Allah, Buddha, Krishna, or Quetzalcoatl help us all!