Magpie

Saturday, August 23, 2003

And as long as we're pointing to cartoons.

| | Posted by Magpie at 1:01 PM | Get permalink

Don't sweat the small stuff.

Ted Rall has another installment in his series of cartoons about central Asia over at EurasiaNet.

For those wanting more Rall, his website is here.

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:58 PM | Get permalink

Washington played around with New Yorkers' health after 9/11.

Since 9/11, many New Yorkers have complained of respiratory and other health problems caused by airborne dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center, especially people who were rescue workers or involved in clearing the WTC site. New Yorkers have accused the government of not doing enough to alert people in the city of the health dangers resulting from the 9/11 attack.

It turns out out the accusations have been sound. A report from the Environmental Protection Agency's inspector general says that the White House leaned on the EPA to minimize the danger caused by dust from the WTC's collapse on 9/11. According to the report, the White House Office of Environmental Quality 'convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones' from news releases.

One example given in the report is a draft a draft EPA press release for Sept. 16, five days after the attack. That original warned New Yorkers that the air near the WTC could contain unsafe level of asbestos, a known carcinogen. After a few words from the White House, however, the final draft of the press release said that the asbestos levels were 'not a cause for public concern.'

New York officials and public health activists have consistently criticized EPA for underestimating the risk and failing to do enough to protect public health. Those critics say the inspector general's report was confirmation from inside EPA that their concerns were valid.

The report concluded that the EPA lacked sufficient data and analyses when it made the statement shortly after the attack that the air in lower Manhattan was "safe" to breathe.

At the time, air-monitoring data was not yet available for pollutants such as particulate matter and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), the report stated.

It also said the EPA should have qualified its assertion that the air was safe to breathe, warning that was not so for children, the elderly or clean-up workers at Ground Zero. Also, while outdoor air in the surrounding area was safe for most adults, indoor air was not, the report said.

The current EPA administrator is calling the report 'sensational' and accusing the EPA inspector-general of 'focusing on nits.' Right.

Via Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:17 PM | Get permalink

Trouble in Florida.

The health of Florida's Everglades could play an important role in next year's US presidential elections, reports the LA Times. The sawgrass wetlands of the Everglades are the largest, and one of the last, wild areas in the state. The aquatic ecosystem of the area is the underpinning for all life in south Florida, including the people who live in Miami and the other large cities in the area.

The Everglades have been under threat for decades, however. Half of their original extent has been turned into cities or farmlands, and levee building has cut the amount of water flowing through the remaining Everglades to the sea. Even worse, agricultural runoff from Florida's extensive sugar fields has greatly increased the phosphorus content of what water still gets to the wetlands. As a result, the sawgrass that's a central element of the Everglades is being replaced by phosphorus-loving cattails, and the animal life that lives in the sawgrass is disappearing.

The environmental damage to the Everglades has been a major political issue in Florida for decades, and resulted in the state and federal governments hammering out a plan to protect and restore the remaining wetlands. This plan was opposed tooth and nail by the sugar industry, which maintained first that it wasn't responsible for the Everglades' problems, and then that the cost of solving those problems would bankrupt the industry. Sugar industry pressure is largely responsible for the passage of a bill giving sugar farms 10 more years before they have to meet new water quality standards. That bill was signed into law by Gov. Jeb Bush to massive public disapproval. According to the Times, Jeb Bush is under fire from environmentalists, members of Florida's congressional delegation, and some members of the Republican party, and is being the target of angry newspaper editorials from all over the state.

The issue of waterborne nutrients and their effects on these remote wetlands at first glance seems arcane, or of concern only to ecological zealots. But for many people in Florida, protecting the Everglades is tantamount to a sacred trust.

In this state, "you can't be seen as supportive of environmental destruction," said Lance deHaven-Smith, a professor and political scientist at Florida State University. Among voters here, deHaven-Smith said, the governor and President Bush "are really seen as one person," and if Gov. Bush appears hostile to the Everglades, it could hurt the president in his reelection bid next year.

The new Everglades law has already engendered a stack of furious newspaper editorials and roiled public opinion. Nathaniel P. Reed, an assistant secretary of the federal Interior Department in two Republican administrations, accused Gov. Bush and lawmakers in the Republican-dominated Legislature of caving in to demands from sugar companies, among the most generous sources of political donations in Florida.

"They failed to understand there would be an uproar throughout the state," Reed said.

Given how important Florida was in Dubya getting his first term, what happens with the Everglades could be critical to his carrying the state in 2004. If the Prez is in a close race, as he was against Al Gore in 2000, his brother's signature on the bill allowing higher phosphorus levels in the Everglades could have also spelled the end for the Dubya administration.

[Free reg. req'd.]

| | Posted by Magpie at 11:56 AM | Get permalink

Pot. Kettle.

From a Reuters dispatch about Dubya's weekly radio broadcast:

"Terrorists commit atrocities because they want the civilized world to flinch and retreat so they can impose their totalitarian vision," Bush said.

| | Posted by Magpie at 10:55 AM | Get permalink

Friday, August 22, 2003

Franken wins first round against Fox.

You'll remember that Fox is suing satirist Al Franken and his publisher, Penguin, for using the phrase 'fair and balanced' in the title of Franken's new book: Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right. Fox claims that the book infringes on its trademark phrase for Fox News, 'Fair and Balanced,' and that potential buyers could be confused into thinking Franken's book was sponsored by Fox.

It looks like Franken won't be losing any sleep over Fox's lawsuit. The only way things could have gone worse for the media giant in federal court was if the judge had actually laughed the case out of court. As it was, the judge refused to grant Fox an injunction preventing Penguin from selling the book.

"There are hard cases and there are easy cases. This is an easy case," said U.S. District Judge Denny Chin. "This case is wholly without merit both factually and legally."

"Parody is a form of artistic expression protected by the First Amendment. The keystone to parody is imitation. Mr. Franken is clearly mocking Fox," said Chin.

The judge said he thought it ironic that a media company that should be fighting to protect free speech would seek to undermine the First Amendment. He also said he thought the "fair and balanced" trademark is weak because the phrase is used so often.

At this point, Penguin can move to have the case dismissed, or Fox could continue with the case despite this inauspicious beginning. So far, neither side has said what it will do.

Via Reuters.

| | Posted by Magpie at 5:34 PM | Get permalink

You never know where you'll find a good story.

When Magpie is looking for interesting things to post about, the conservative Christian website Crosswalk isn't the first place she checks. But the law of averages catches up with everyone, and Crosswalk has a surprisingly good article about US Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft and the proposed Patriot II and Victory Acts. The article goes into some depth on the provisions of Patriot II, and it gives far more space to criticism of the bills from the ACLU and Gun Owners of America than it does to Ashcroft and other Justice Department spokespeople.

"If PATRIOT II passes, a substantial number of political lobbies, including Gun Owners of America, could be declared terrorist organizations by an administration that simply dislikes their methods and goals," [GOA executive director Larry] Pratt warned, noting that his group had compiled an online analysis of the potential misuses of the proposed law. "All this in the name of fighting terrorism?"

Critics speculate that as a result of public criticism of the PATRIOT Act, some provisions of PATRIOT II have been introduced separately as the "Vital Interdiction of Criminal Terrorist Organizations" or VICTORY Act. Pratt said renaming even part of the PATRIOT II legislation is "an Orwellian re-write."

"The administration realized that, 'Oh, we've got to put some new paint on the garbage can, so hopefully, folks in the Congress won't get the idea that this, still, is a stinky garbage can,'" Pratt said. "But it's still a stinky garbage can. VICTORY Act, PATRIOT II, it doesn't matter; it's the same thing."

Magpie would suggest that this sort of hostile coverage from a decidedly right-wing news source is a strong indication of why Ashcroft is on the road trying to drum up support for Washington's draconian 'anti-terrorism' measures.

| | Posted by Magpie at 4:47 PM | Get permalink

How journalists go bad.

They hang around with other journalists, in gangs, which causes all sorts of problems. Journalist Declan Hill shows us how the way Western journalists work in Iraq has produced coverage that made the guerrilla war there look like a surprise, when it should have surprised no one.

Arriving in Baghdad is to discover that most of the international press corps is holed up in a two-hotel compound at the centre of the city. The hotels — the Palestine and the old Sheraton — are five star, luxurious places with air conditioning and plush lobbies. One night costs about $100.00 (U.S.) or about ten times the average monthly salary of an Iraqi civil servant. Outside the compound is a ring of barbed wire, pickets of American soldiers and crowds of imploring Iraqis, desperate to enter.

The problem is that most journalists get up in this journalistic prison, talk with their $100.00 a day “fixer”, chat with other journalists and then sally out of the ring of steel in air conditioned minivans to visit the section of Baghdad that their “fixer” suggests they go to. The Iraqis they meet are mostly sound bite suppliers, rather than real human beings.

In the evening the journalists talk to each other. They share thoughts and comments. They divide themselves into intellectual camps. They reach consensuses. But they are talking and drinking their beers in conditions just about as far from the real Iraq as they could possibly be.

The Iraqi “fixers” are, in truth, the real journalists. They speak the language. They have the connections. They were frequently “embedded” themselves with the former regime. If they are against doing a story...it is very difficult for a foreigner to know or understand how much they are influencing the story.

Via rabble.

| | Posted by Magpie at 4:33 PM | Get permalink

Department of Historical Revision.

Take on the News points out that the US government has been changing headlines on press releases sent out when Dubya gave his aircraft carrier speech.

The original White House release was titled, "President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended." But now the release reads "President Bush Announces Major Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended."

It reminds Magpie of the part of 1984 in which old newspapers and books are being destroyed, and replaced by copies that have been rewritten to reflect Big Brother's current political line.

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:03 AM | Get permalink

An Iraqi woman's new talent.

skippy alerts us all to an excellent Iraqi blog, Baghdad Burning. Here's a sample from Thursday's posts:

The silence was shattered a few moments later by the sound of bullets in the distance. It was just loud enough to get your attention, but too far away to be the source of any real anxiety. I tried to determine where they were coming from…

E: How far do you think that is?
Me: I don’t know… ‘bout a kilometer?
E: Yeah, about.
Me: Not American bullets-
E: No, it’s probably from a…
Me: Klashnikov.
E (impressed): You’re getting good at this.

No- I’m getting great at it. I can tell you if it’s ‘them’ or ‘us’. I can tell you how far away it is. I can tell you if it’s a pistol or machine-gun, tank or armored vehicle, Apache or Chinook… I can determine the distance and maybe even the target. That’s my new talent. It’s something I’ve gotten so good at, I frighten myself. What’s worse is that almost everyone seems to have acquired this new talent… young and old. And it’s not something that anyone will appreciate on a resume…

I keep wondering… will an airplane ever sound the same again?

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:01 AM | Get permalink

Everyone is a soft target now in Iraq. And Afghanistan.

First, Robert Fisk of the UK Independent weighs in on the bombing of the UN compound in Iraq:

Within hours of the car bomb explosion, we were being told that this was an attack on a "soft target," a blow against the United Nations itself. True, it was a "soft" target, although the machine gun nest on the roof of the U.N. building might have suggested that even the international body was militarizing itself. True, too, it was a shattering assault on the United Nations as an institution. But in reality, yesterday's attack was against the United States.

For it proves that no foreign organization -- no NGO, no humanitarian organization, no investor, no businessman -- can expect to be safe under the United States' occupation rule. The U.S. proconsul, L. Paul Bremer, was supposed to be an "anti-terrorism" expert. Yet since he arrived in Iraq, he has seen more "terrorism" than he can have dreamed of in his worst nightmares -- and has been able to do nothing about it. Pipeline sabotage, electricity sabotage, water sabotage, attacks on U.S. troops and British troops and Iraqi policemen and now the bombing of the United Nations ... what comes next? Americans can reconstruct the dead faces of Saddam's two sons but they can't reconstruct Iraq.

Of course, this is not the first indication that the "internationals" are in the sights of Iraq's fast-growing resistance movement. Last month, a U.N. employee was shot dead south of Baghdad. Two International Red Cross workers were murdered, the second of them a Sri Lankan employee killed in his clearly marked Red Cross car on Highway 8 just north of Hilla. When he was found, his blood was still pouring from the door of his vehicle. The Red Cross chief delegate, who signed the doomed man out on his mission to the south of Baghdad, is now leaving Iraq. Already, members of the Red Cross themselves are confined to their regional offices and cannot travel across Iraq by road.

An American contractor was killed in Tikrit a week ago. A British journalist was murdered in Baghdad last month. Who is safe now? Who will now feel safe at a Baghdad hotel when one of the most famous of them all -- the old Canal Hotel that housed the U.N. arms inspectors before the invasion -- has been blown up. Will the next "spectacular" be against occupation troops? Against the occupation leadership? Against the so-called Iraqi Interim Council? Against journalists?

And then the Christian Science Monitor reports on a string of guerrilla attacks on soft targets in Afghanistan that has killed 90 people in 10 days.

From the bombing of a minibus full of women and children in Helmand Province to the nighttime assault on a border security post in Khost, these recent attacks are part of what US and Afghan officials say is a pattern of shifting attacks away from well-armed US bases and toward more vulnerable civilians, aid workers, and local officials.

Whatever the origin of these attacks, the effect is being felt across Afghanistan, as foreign aid organizations pull out foreign staffers, and Afghans lose hope that the international community will ever rebuild their country.

US military officials say that they are primarily focused on hunting Al Qaeda. While the US does come to the aid of the Afghan national forces, commanders say they simply do not have the manpower to protect every village.

The United Nations, meanwhile, has been calling for a larger international military and security force in Afghanistan, one that could provide security outside Kabul. But as yet, member nations have not agreed to that, and observers do not see it as imminent.

Fisk via also not found in nature.

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:00 AM | Get permalink

Thursday, August 21, 2003

The eyes of Texas.

MoveOn.org is trying to focus those eyes upon the unfair tactics that Republicans are using to try to get a majority in Texas' delegation to the US House of Representatives.

So far, the group has raised US $400,000 to buy ads explaining what the Republicans are doing, and supporting the 11 state senators who've fled the state in order to prevent a gerrymander of Texas' House districts. MoveOn.org needs another $600,000 so they can spend $1 million on a lot of ads.

Please help make our "Defend Democracy" ad campaign possible to show Majority Leader Delay and Texas Republican officials that all of America is watching what they are doing. Let's show Texas Governor Rick Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst that there are political consequences for doing Tom Delay's Congressional dirty work in Texas. Please support our television ad campaign to let all Texans know exactly what their politicians are up to.

If you aren't a member of MoveOn.org, now would be a good time to join. And if you are a member, Magpie suggests giving up some hard-earned dollars to help show the White House that there are things that people won't put up with. For more info or to donate, go here.

| | Posted by Magpie at 11:17 PM | Get permalink

You have to take polls with a grain of salt.

But who needs salt when another one shows bad news for Dubya?

The new Zogby poll shows that Dubya's approval rating has almost dropped to that psychologicaly important 50-percent point. The actual numbers are 52 percent approving of how he's doing his job, and 48 percent disapproving.

Similar to the Field Poll from California that we cited earlier today, Zogby finds that respondents would like to see someone new in the White House, by a 48-45 margin.

Magpie would love to know whether Zogby matched Dubya up against specific potential Democratic challengers and, if so, what the figures showed. Does anyone out there have info?

| | Posted by Magpie at 8:12 PM | Get permalink

Zuni tribe scuttles Big Energy's strip mining plans.

For two decades, the Salt River Project (an Arizona-based electric and water utility) had planned to strip-mine coal on land it owned at Fence Lake in New Mexico. To get the coal to its Coronado Generating Station near St. Johns, Arizona, SRP planned to build a 44-mile railroad through lands rife with archaeological and burial sites significant to the Zuni tribe and other tribes in the region. But worst of all, the utility wanted to tap aquifers that, according to the Zunis, were the source of water for the sacred Zuni Salt Lake, a ritual and pilgrimage site for 20 tribes, including the Zunis.

Enlisting other tribes and environmentalists as allies, the Zunis fought a protracted battle against the coal development. The case they built against SRP's plans was so strong that the utility abandoned plans for its Fence Lake strip mine earlier this month. Grist Magazine has an interview with Pablo Padilla, one of the leaders of the Zunis' successful fight against SRP.

Grist: You grew up on the pueblo. Was it difficult to leave and then return?

Padilla: Yes. There are a lot of issues that come about by you leaving. My decision to transplant my little boy [Charles, age four] to the city while I get my [law] degree is a difficult one. I mean this with all sincerity: One of the big reasons why I invested five years of my life in this project is because I want him to be able to make his pilgrimage to Zuni Salt Lake. It's a really special thing. You go out to the lake and perform a ceremonial ritual. You go out there as a young boy and you make a pilgrimage there and make offerings to her and then you take salt from her and you go back and give the salt to your aunties.

That's been going on for millennia. It's one of the oldest rituals we have. At least 20 indigenous communities go to the Zuni Salt Lake. So even though the land is Zuni land, we're just holding it for everyone else. Salt is really important. She's a deity. She resides there at the lake. That whole area is a sanctuary area, so even when tribes used to fight, whenever we went into that area, everyone used to put their weapons down.

Grist: How does the fight over the mine tie in with the history of exploitation of native lands by the government and by corporations?

Padilla: I consider this a classic story of someone bringing in a heavily subsidized industry at the expense of a local community, under the auspices of energy needs. In this case it turned out to be an Indian community. One of the real tragedies is the realization that rural America is so dependent on extractive industries. The state of New Mexico was going to get about $200 million from this, and 150 jobs, and now they're not. So we're being pitted against other people who wanted to see this happen.

One thing to note is that [New Mexico] Gov. Bill Richardson [D] has been quoted in the papers as saying that he's happy about this decision. That's a good sign. I'm really happy that we have leadership that can recognize the value [of Zuni Salt Lake] over and above what we might receive [economically].

The Zuni Salt Lake Coalition's website has more information about the coal development that SRP had planned here.

The website for the Zuni Tribe is here.

Via rabble.

| | Posted by Magpie at 6:57 PM | Get permalink

Oh Portland!

Dubya was in town today to give a speech at the private University of Portland, for which he picked up US $1 million for his re-election campaign. Reuters reports that Portlanders gave the Prez a fine Oregon-style welcome on the way to the university, where 2000 demonstrators met him with signs criticizing his domestic and foreign policies.

At one neighborhood intersection dozens of protesters greeted the motorcade with their fingers raised in an obscene gesture, and a lawn sign along the way read, "This tree is anti-Bush."

| | Posted by Magpie at 4:26 PM | Get permalink

And then there's the good news from California.

Dubya's poll ratings keep going down, putting an apparent end to any Republican hopes of carrying the state in the 2004 presidential election. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the new Field Poll shows that only half of California voters approve of Dubya's job performance. His numbers had been as high as 76 percent right after 9/11.

Even more striking, however, is the decline in the percentage of voters who say they'd vote to re-elect the president. Only a month ago, they were split 46-44 percent in favor of re-election. The new poll shows the split at 42-50 against a second term.

But the president may have seen a ray of hope in a Field Poll in April that showed him leading the yet-undetermined Democratic Party nominee by 45 percent to 40 percent.

"The Bush strategists were saying, 'Maybe this could be the year when we could come and win California,' " [poll director Mark] DiCamillo said. "Well, since then, this image has faded, and now he's trailing by five points."

The new poll showed state voters preferred the unnamed Democratic nominee to Bush, 47 percent to 42 percent.

The anemic state of California's economy continues to plague Bush. State voters, by 50 percent to 43 percent, disapproved of the president's handling of the economy.

But Bush's numbers in the state may have been hurt even more by the war in Iraq, which divided the electorate and alienated some of the Democrats and independent voters who had rallied behind the president.

Asked whether the war in Iraq is worth the toll in lives and other costs, 74 percent of Republicans said "yes." But two-thirds of Democrats and 50 percent of nonpartisans said the war was not worth the costs.

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:28 PM | Get permalink

Ahhnold isn't any Jesse Ventura.

Magpie has noticed a lot of comparisons in the media between Arnold Schwarzenegger's campaign to replace Gray Davis as governor of California, and the successful effort by Jesse Ventura to win the governor's mansion in Minnesota. Despite the show business background of both candidates, an article by Eric Slater in the LA Times suggests that the similarities end there.

On of the main points of difference is that Ventura's campaign started out more than a year before the general election, and proceeded according to a well-thought out plan. While Schwarzenegger's campaign may also have such a plan (this remains to be seen), there's only 7 weeks between today and the election. When this short campaign length is coupled with Schwarzenegger's high standing in current polls, Slater repeats the oft-heard suggestion that the election is Schwarzenegger's to lose. (And his vagueness about issues and his own political positions may be early evidence of an ability to steal defeat from the jaws of victory.) In contrast, Ventura had already proven his credibility as a candidate before the election by slogging through a heavy schedule of interviews, candidate debates, and personal appearances.

Another crucial element in Ventura's success was Minnesota's voter registration laws: a voter can register at the polls on the day of the election. Ventura's campaign put a major effort into boosting turnout, with the result that one out of six voters registered at the polls for the November 1998 election. Ventura got 73 percent of that vote, pushing him to victory over his Democratic and Republican opponents. California closes voter registration 30 days before an election, so Schwarzenegger won't be able to depend on last-minute voters.

In October 1997, [Ventura] sat down with a handful of advisors at the Famous Dave's restaurant in Maple Grove, Minn. The advisors, mostly onetime Ross Perot operatives, presented him with a handful of mileposts they said he must meet to have a chance. Among them: Attend every candidate gathering and then every debate, and do well in those debates.

"We sent him everywhere, to every forum, to get him trained," said Ventura's then-campaign manager, Dean Barkley, who is now running independent Arianna Huffington's California campaign. "It paid off."

By the summer of 1998, Ventura had become a phenomenon, with fans and autograph seekers following him everywhere he went. Admirers are one thing, however, strong campaign backers another, and he was still polling at about 10%, well behind Humphrey, who was leading, and Coleman.

With his anti-establishment message honed at county fairs, small-town parades and Elks Lodge speeches, though, Ventura sparkled at two televised debates that September. His poll numbers skyrocketed to 24% ? striking range, according to Barkley's plan. [...]

Behind Ventura's carefully crafted outsider image was his perhaps underappreciated experience as mayor of Brooklyn Park, Minn., the state's seventh-largest city. More important still was his pre-campaign experience as a local talk-radio host.

With Minnesota at the forefront of the then-strong third party movement in politics, Ventura the radio host became well-versed on arcane issues ranging from tax law to public transportation, and by the time he entered the race had developed well-defined Libertarian-style answers to almost any policy question ? knowledge that impressed even the wary.

"Jesse had some real experience, unlike Schwarzenegger," said USC political scientist Sherry Bebitch Jeffe. "He didn't walk right off the movie screen and into the governor's office."

[Free reg. req'd.]

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:08 PM | Get permalink

Wednesday, August 20, 2003

The big surprises continue.

The NY Times reports that energy industry monitors warned three months ago that the power grid in Ohio and the Midwest was especially vulnerable to 'cascading events' like the ones that blacked out part of Canada and the US last week. And as we all know, it appear that the failures began in Ohio, in the system run by the FirstEnergy Corp.

Officials with the group, the North American Electric Reliability Council, in a report that singled out the Midwest as the only part of the country at risk of such a devastating event, said the region could face "large, unanticipated power flows" this summer and would have to be prepared to handle the challenges with care.

Officials at the reliability council, an industry group, lacked the authority to order the utilities to take additional steps to prevent a small local failure from snowballing into a catastrophic one. And they concede that they did not even informally suggest anything more be done to protect that section of the nation's fragile grid. But the report makes it clear that the industry had been notified of the threat in the region and the fine margin for error that existed.

Needless to say, FirstEnergy hasn't had any comments on the NAERC report.

| | Posted by Magpie at 9:14 PM | Get permalink