Secular Blasphemy
all the news I see fit to print

 



Subscribe to "Secular Blasphemy" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

 

 

  9. oktober 2004


It's Good to Be in DC!

The creative geniuses at JibJab have created a hilarious followup to the already legendary "This Land": It's Good to be in DC.


11:19:25 PM    comment []  trackback []

Nobel winner argues AIDS is a race-war bioweapon

I was cautiously positive about awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Wangari Maathai, hoping there were no skeletons in her closet. Then, one fell out.

It is a common belief in Africa that AIDS/HIV is a biological weapon created by the CIA (or whoever) as part of a racist plot to kill black people. When Maathai expressed her conviction that AIDS is a biological weapon even without making a direct reference to the most extreme tinfoil hat version of this conspiracy theory, it must be interpreted in that context:

"Some say that Aids came from the monkeys, and I doubt that because we have been living with monkeys (since) time immemorial, others say it was a curse from God, but I say it cannot be that.

"Us black people are dying more than any other people in this planet," Maathai told a press conference in Nairobi a day after winning the prize for her work in human rights and reversing deforestation across Africa.

"It's true that there are some people who create agents to wipe out other people. If there were no such people, we could have not have invaded Iraq," she said.

"We invaded Iraq because we believed that Saddam Hussein had made, or was in the process of creating agents of biological warfare," said Maathai.

"In fact it (the HIV virus) is created by a scientist for biological warfare," she added.

Back in August, she expressed the conspiracy part even more clearly.

"Do not be naive. AIDS is not a curse from God to Africans or the black people. It is a tool to control them designed by some evil-minded scientists, but we may not know who particularly did (it)," the August 31 article quoted her as saying at a seminar in her home town of Nyeri.

Considering that AIDS is one of the most serious issues facing Africa today, hailing a conspiracy theorist who seriously undermines scientific research on HIV and AIDS is clearly counter-productive. People who believe stupid things about AIDS, like South Africa's president Thabo Mbeki, are likely to make stupid and dangerous policy decisions.

Most official responses to Maathai winning the prize were positive, but the US congratulation was understandably cautious:

The United States on Friday congratulated Maathai on winning the Nobel Peace Prize, but tempered its praise over her claims about AIDS.

"She said (HIV/Aids) was invented as a bioweapon in some laboratory in the West," a senior state department official said. "We don't agree with that."

I should have seen it coming: another tragic own-goal for the Nobel Peace Prize Committee. The committee members should have known about her nutty statements when they made the decisionto award her the prize, and pushing such conspiracy theories should certainly disqualified her.

I wonder who the runner-up was? No, please don't tell me.

Update: The Nobel Committee did not know about Maathai's opinions about AIDS being a racist bioweapon when they awarded the prize. Norwegian VG writes:

- I don't know about this. I was not aware of this, says teh chairman of the Nobel Committee Ole Danbolt Mjøs.

He doesn't want to comment on these statements before he has researched them further.

Obviously Google is not part of the search apparatus of the Nobel committee!

Ironically, one of the stated reasons for this year's prize was Maathai's application of science.

"Maathai combines science, social commitment and active politics."

A combination of quack science and activism is not necessarily what Africa needs more of.


10:56:08 PM    comment []  trackback []

Afghan democracy off to troubled start

The first democratic presidential election is history, but all but two (or three) of the candidates urged a boycott and say they will refuse to accept the result due to fears of fraud.

Ink that does not stain spurred at least 14 of the 15 challengers to Afghan President Hamid Karzai to unite in a boycott of Saturday's election, charging that it was open to fraud because citizens could possibly vote several times.

The election commission, however, said the election should go ahead.

A spokesman for the joint UN-Afghan electoral commission said the vote would continue as it had been generally "safe and orderly".

On a more positive note, tight security seems to have prevented the Taliban from making good on its threats to attack voters.

I think nobody should expect the troubled country's first election to be flawless. It remains to be seen if there is any evidence widespread fraud actually happened. It is very unfortunate that such a detail as the ink used to mark voters' thumbs apparently can be easily washed off can put the outcome into doubt. Reportedly voting was delayed as administrators struggled to replace the faulty ink.

It is surely progress that the Afghans are debating the minutae of the democratic process instead of being engaged in civil warfare. I still hope the legitimacy of the election is not dangerously undermined.


5:21:13 PM    comment []  trackback []

Howard wins Australian election

Australian voters have handed Prime Minister John Howard and his conservative party a victory against the Labor-led opponents, giving him a historic fourth term with what appears to become a slightly stronger parliamentary majority.

The counting is now 70% completed, and Labor leader Mark Latham has conceded defeat.

Labor had promised to pull Australian forces out of Iraq if they won. Howard vows to stay on.

I suspect Tim Blair, who predicted a Labor win, will live down being proved wrong.

Link: Raw Aussie numbers as they come in.

PS: Norwegian leftist daily Dagbladet cannot hide its disappointment when it states that "Australia elects dark blue" as if Howard's centre-right coalition represented the far right.

Update: Hehe. Tim Blair celebrates the result, and admits being wrong (you know, he's no George Bush):

Never again will I doubt the wisdom of Australians.

The wisdom of ~52% of them, anyway. Note Tim's email to VodkaPundit's Will Collier:

We aren't Spanish, you know. Now it's time to take the battle to a whole new level!

When the hangover goes away.


2:40:15 PM    comment []  trackback []

Debate #2

The Second Presidential Debate happened yesterday, while I was out enjoying myself with some friends. I have now read the debate, seen around half of it (video here). It looked like a good exchange of views, and both candidates handled it quite well.

Especially considering that Bush is widely believed to have lost the first debate, an effective tie would have been a win for the president.

ABC News has polled 515 registered voters (4.5 point error margin), and came up with a statistical tie:

Among registered voters who watched Friday night's debate, 44 percent called John Kerry the winner, 41 percent said President Bush won and 13 percent called it a tie. That three-point difference between Kerry and Bush is within the poll's margin of sampling error.

Of course, the Norwegian media (and, I bet, a lot of other media worldwide) doesn't understand fine points like margin of error and proclaimed Kerry the winner based on these numbers.

Update: According to FactCheck.Org, Cheney's favourite website (cough), both candidates were lying through their teeth economical with the truth. Why do politicians do that? Because voters let them get away with it.

CNN's factcheck is slightly more lenient to both candidates. Both, however, note that John Kerry's claim that former Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki was forced to resign is an utter falsehood.

Kerry implies that Shinseki was forced to retire as a result of his comments about troop levels in Iraq, which is inaccurate. Shinseki served a full four-year term as Army chief of staff, and did not retire early. Since World War II, no Army chief of staff has served longer than four years.

On the other hand, Bush's accusation that Kerry would cut the intelligence budget by $7.5bn in the 90s is desperately in need of some nuance.


12:16:37 PM    comment []  trackback []


Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website. © Copyright 2004 Jan Haugland.
Last update: 01.11.2004; 14:35:23.

October 2004
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Sep   Nov

Library

My articles

Sport

"Can you hear me, Maggie Thatcher?"

9/11 conspiracies

Debunking Michael Meacher

Lost and Found

Don't mess with my false memories

Afterlives Inc

Does the soul exist? (Part 2)

Love to Hate

Why Anti-Americanism?

Marital Bliss?

The bridezilla from hell (pt 2)

anti-gun nut

Michael Moore's unconvincing defence

The Just Not Right Dept

'Anthropic principle' debunk

Religion

Is it right because God says so?

Humour

Hu's on first

Words, words, words

The lost philological battles

History

So you think you are having a bad time?

Nutrition

Living on sunlight, or feeding on gullability?