Merry Christmas everybody!

To all my IM friends, here is wishing you the all time best Christmas day imaginable.

And in honor of Bishop Shrewsbury, who hates John Lennon, here is your Christmas song of the day.

Let us hope that we all live to see a day when there is no more war, no more hatred, and no more reason not to love everybody on this planet as if they were your brother or your sister.

Because you know what, they are. 

How the deification of soldiers is hurting them in the long run.

This is an excerpt from a Boston Globe story entitled "Joining the Military doesn't make you a hero:"  
When soldiers were part of society, people recognized them as ordinary human beings. Now, with the emergence of the all-volunteer army, society has transferred the burden of war to a small, self-contained caste cut off from the American mainstream. This distance allows civilians to develop extravagant fantasies about soldiers that feed the militarist impulse. If we believe our soldiers are superheroes, it makes sense to send them to faraway battlefields to solve our perceived problems in the world. That is why, in this era of seemingly endless war, politicians, the defense industry, and even big-time sports compete with each other to promote hero-worship of soldiers and veterans. 

This serves the cynical interests of those who, for political or business reasons, want to encourage American involvement in foreign wars. Even worse, it distracts attention away from the scandalous way we treat our veterans. Cheering for them in public and saluting them in cliché-ridden speeches is a way to disguise the fact that our society callously discards many of them. Shocking rates of unemployment, mental illness, homelessness, addiction, and suicide among our veterans constitute a national disgrace. It is far easier, however, to spend a few seconds applauding a smiling soldier than to contemplate a troubled veteran left behind by an uncaring country. 

The soldier acknowledging cheers at a ball game is a fantasy figure we can easily admire. Veterans in need are more disturbing, so we keep them invisible. If we truly considered our uniformed fighters heroic, we would show them real gratitude rather than the phony kind that gives us a shiver of momentary pride but does them little good.

This issue has been bothering me for quite some time, only  in today's world discussing it is tantamount to treason in the eyes of many.

I think we have all seen politicians giving lip service to our military men and women, and then turning a blind eye to their needs after their service is complete.

The suicide rate for veterans far exceeds the number killed in combat, and even if they do not kill themselves many others are diagnosed with PTSD and have significant trouble reentering civilian life.

By labeling them "heroes," and giving them almost mythical abilities, we forget to treat them like the fragile human beings that they are.

In the end we place them on a pedestal and then abandon them as if they were a marble monument to bravery, instead of a thinking, feeling, suffering, member of the human race.

Well great now we are on the cusp of starting another war with the Native American people. Over a stupid pipeline yet.

Courtesy of Lakota Voice:  

In response to today’s vote in the U.S. House of Representatives to authorize the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, the Rosebud Sioux Tribal President announced that the Rosebud Sioux Tribe (Sicangu Lakota Oyate) recognizes the authorization of this pipeline as an act of war. 

The Tribe has done its part to remain peaceful in its dealings with the United States in this matter, in spite of the fact that the Rosebud Sioux Tribe has yet to be properly consulted on the project, which would cross through Tribal land, and the concerns brought to the Department of Interior and to the Department of State have yet to be addressed. 

“The House has now signed our death warrants and the death warrants of our children and grandchildren. The Rosebud Sioux Tribe will not allow this pipeline through our lands,” said President Scott of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe. “We are outraged at the lack of intergovernmental cooperation. We are a sovereign nation and we are not being treated as such. We will close our reservation borders to Keystone XL. Authorizing Keystone XL is an act of war against our people.” 

In February of this year, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe and other members of the Great Sioux Nation adopted Tribal resolutions opposing the Keystone XL project. 

“The Lakota people have always been stewards of this land,” added President Scott. “We feel it is imperative that we provide safe and responsible alternative energy resources not only to Tribal members but to non-Tribal members as well. We need to stop focusing and investing in risky fossil fuel projects like TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline. We need to start remembering that the earth is our mother and stop polluting her and start taking steps to preserve the land, water, and our grandchildren’s future.” 

The Rosebud Sioux Tribe, along with several other South Dakota Tribes, stand together in opposition to risky and dangerous fossil fuel projects like TransCanada’s Keystone XL. The proposed route of TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline crosses directly through Great Sioux Nation (Oceti Sakowin) Treaty lands as defined by both the 1851 and 1868 Fort Laramie Treaties and within the current exterior boundaries of the Rosebud Sioux Reservation and Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation.

Well that could not be any more disturbing to read.

And the Lakota tribe is completely in the right on this issue.  Something that usually I would expect the Democrats to recognize.

Look I understand why Mary Landrieu sponsored the bill to authorize the Keystone XL pipeline, and I understand why some Democrats feel they must support it.

But ultimately it will not help Landrieu hang onto her Senate seat, and it WILL anger not only the native American people but also the environmentalist who have usually been a reliable demographic for Democrats.

Personally I would rather lose a Senate seat, than to lose the support of voters that we are desperately going to need in the next two years.

Right Wing outrage of the day. Bruce Springsteen played an anti-war song during concert to celebrate Veteran's Day.

Courtesy of TPM:  

Pretty much everyone has had something to say about Springsteen's performance Tuesday at the "Concert for Valor," an HBO musical event for veterans held on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. 

Performing with Zac Brown and Dave Grohl, Springsteen sang "Fortunate Son," Creedence Clearwater Revival's classic Vietnam War-era anthem that examines issues of class and jingoism in America. John Fogerty, the CCR frontman, said that his own experience as a drafted serviceman served as an inspiration for the song. 

"I was the same age as the soldiers serving in Vietnam and from the same lower-middle class as them," Fogerty once said. 

But to some conservative ears, the song hit the wrong note at Tuesday's concert. 

"The song, not to put too fine a point on it, is an anti-war screed, taking shots at 'the red white and blue,'" wrote Ethan Epstein at The Weekly Standard. 

The performance was made even worse, Epstein contended, because "Fortunate Son" is "an anti-draft song, and this concert was largely organized to honor those who volunteered to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq." 

The Boss has been in the Fox News crosshairs all day, too. On Fox Business Network, Stuart Varney questioned why Springsteen, "an outspoken leftist," would play politics with the troops. 

"So much for HBO's 'Concert for Valor,'" Clayton Morris said at the outset of this morning's "Fox & Friends." 

On Fox's "Outnumbered," co-host Andrea Tantaros professed to be a fan of both Springsteen and Grohl, but wondered why they didn't just go with a different song. 

"It's amazing to me that nobody — think of all the people that are involved in a concert like this — nobody had the brains to stop and say, 'You guys might want to pick a different song,'" Tantaros said.

Gee, I really like the song.

Apparently this is the portion that pissed off the Right Wing so much:

It ain’t me, it ain’t me 
I ain’t no Senator’s son 
It ain’t me, it ain’t me 
I ain’t no fortunate one 

The song is written about how fundamental unfair it is that politicians start wars in which their children are not forced to fight and die.

Personally I would think that it is a sentiment shared not just by veterans of Vietnam but by the soldiers of today.

This song is not anti-veteran, it's anti-war. I feel very confident in saying that the vast majority of veterans are not pro-war, and therefore embrace the sentiment.

And of course the song is also anti-warmonger.

Perhaps it is that last part which irritates the Fox News crowd so much. You know the same ones who helped spread the Bush Administration propaganda and cheered from the sidelines as we sent thousands of young soldiers to their deaths.

Jeb Bush's son says that it is more than likely that his dad will run in 2016. Oh joy.

I'm baaack.

Courtesy of CBC News:  

Jeb Bush's son said it's "more than likely" his dad will run for president in 2016 in an interview that aired Sunday. 

George P. Bush, Jeb Bush's eldest son, was interviewed by ABC News. The younger Bush is knee-deep in his own campaign this year, running for Texas land commissioner. 

ABC's Jon Karl asked Bush whether his father is running for president. 

"I think he's still assessing it," Bush said, offering the same demurral his father and other members of his family have given in recent months. 

When Karl pressed Bush to offer a specific probability, Bush said, "It's more than likely that he's giving this a serious thought...and moving forward." 

"More than likely that he'll run?" Karl asked. 

"That he'll run," Bush responded. "If you had asked me a few years back, I would have said it was less likely." He added that if his father does decide to run, "The family will be behind him 100 percent."

Well since you would have had to have been in a coma the last two years not to realize that Hillary Clinton is also running in 2016, that means, if Jeb's son is accurate, that 2016 will be the battle of the presidential dynasties.

As much as we may all want newer blood in the White House the fact is that we are going to be witnessing yet another clash of the titans.

And lucky us we will all get to watch the past scandals of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush dredged up and splattered across our TV and computer screens for probably several months or more.

Personally I think in this day and age that hearing the conservatives trying to use Bill's sexcapades with Monica Lewsinky to hijack the "War on Women" and use it against the Democrats, will have a significantly smaller impact than seeing all of George Bush's lies and manipulations that he used to get us into two unnecessary wars trotted out for the voters to revisit.

But of course I am a Liberal and I would not vote for another Bush even under threat of torture. Which is ANOTHER thing Americans did under a Bush administration. 

Cyber warfare center prepared in 2011

Cyber Warfare

Increasing attention to the threat of cyberspace makes the German government decided to open a national center of cyber warfare. "Cyber-National Defense Center" which, according to a spokesman for the German Interior Ministry, will open next year.

According to statistics, in 2009, the German government noted that there were about 900 attacks on their computer systems. This year, the increase in numbers. In the first half alone, there are up to 1600 attack.

As quoted from CBS News, Thursday, December 30, 2010, the main purpose of the center of a national cyber infrastructure to protect the Internet from foreign attack countries whose numbers continue to rise. The Government indicated, higher number because many of the attacks, which mostly come from China, are not reported.

American intelligence reports doubted the success of Afghanistan war

American Inteligence Report

Two U.S. intelligence report recently described the U.S. pessimism about the success of the U.S. war strategy in Afghanistan. 

The report, known as the National Intelligence estimate leaked to The New York Times, Wednesday (15/12) and considering the slim chance that the results are expected in Afghanistan, but Pakistan take action against militants on the border of their sanctuary. 

Wikileaks, Trigger "War of the 21st Century"

Wikileaks

The world entered a new era of war following the development of thousands of publications owned by the U.S. government's secret documents by the site Wikileaks. This new war was just relying on the intelligence and sophistication of this new technology because the war took place in cyberspace.

The activists in the virtual world that supports Wikileaks launched a "war of the 21st century" against those who are regarded as hindering the party and tried to silence Wikileaks, like Mastercard, PayPal, Visa,