Legalized Barbarism on America’s Doorstep

Do you like that little ivory trinket you adorn yourself with? I’ll bet the elephant that gave up his life for it was pretty fond of it too. Do you care that you are supporting organized crime by purchasing that cute little black market item? How about the possible extinction of elephants just so you can show off your trophy?

Sure, look the other way and contemplate your rationale for why an elephant had to die for your selfish pleasure.

Up to 5 percent of Africa's population of elephants was killed by poachers for the year ending in August 2006, said University of Washington biologist Samuel Wasser. That amounted to more than 23,000 elephants, which yielded an estimated 240 tons of ivory. Photo credit: Benezeth Mutayoba

A kilogram of high-quality ivory sold for $200 on the black market in 2004, but the price tag for that quantity ballooned to $750 last year, Wasser said.

The tusks are sought after in some Asian countries, sometimes in the form of hankos, round cylinders of ivory on which some communities in China and Japan carve their personal seal for use as a prestigious signature stamp. The creamy tusks also are used to carve cane and knife handles and other small objects. The price of high-quality ivory has created a black market, with commodity speculators driving poaching to never-before-seen levels, Wasser said.

"This is serious business, and if we don't open our eyes to the problem, we can kiss our elephants goodbye," he said.

In fact, elephants have been poached to extinction already in Senegal and to near extinction in Guinea-Bissau, said Sergios-Orestis Kolokotronis, a biologist at Columbia University.

The key to poaching prevention for African elephants lies in enforcement of a 1989 international trade ban which was highly effective immediately after it was enacted, but is no longer because governments withdrew funding for its enforcement, Wasser said.

So, that tells the rest of the world that governments don’t care if the elephants do become extinct. There must be more pressing problems than to worry about taking a valuable piece of the animal kingdom off of the charts. Sure, that’s it, there are more important matters to be concerned with, like making money from the slaughter of this doomed species.

China and the U.S. are the top two importers of ivory that fuels a black market that is growing at an alarming rate due to organized crime. And guess what? The law says it’s okay to do it. Sure, you can bring in ivory tusks from Africa, but only as long as they are trophies. Wow, how trusting of the Customs Service to believe that all of those ivory tusks are for trophies only. It sure was thoughtful of our lawmakers to show the world we are tough on poachers and then give trophy hunters the okay to contribute to the elephants extinction.

What are we doing to our children?

A U.K. study shows that children in America and the U.K. are increasingly being given anti-psychotic drugs to treat a myriad of problems, most commonly autism and hyperactivity. This increased dependency on drugs to solve or control these problems could be jeopardizing the health of these children. We don’t know for certain because long-term effects of these drugs are not tested before being administered!

Here’s the side effects we do know of: weight gain, nervous-system problems and heart trouble. There is little long-term evidence about whether these drugs are even safe for children. Weight gain alone creates additional risks including diabetes.

Once again we go for the immediate quick and easy answer. We use our children as guinea pigs because some pharmaceutical company’s ad hawks their latest creation as the answer we have all been praying for.

What is the root cause of hyperactivity? Why is a pill the only answer to address this problems?

There has been a great deal of focus on Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder as a cause of hyperactivity. Other conditions can cause it as well. Normal young children can be very lively and may or may not have short attention spans. Normal teenagers can also appear hyperactive; puberty can cause it. Children who are bored, are suffering from mental conflict, or are having problems at home — which may even include sexual abuse — can be hyperactive. The disorder has a large range of effects on children. Some have learning disabilities, while others may be very gifted, or both. None of these conditions warrant the use of drugs.

Hyperactivity can also occur because of problems with hearing or vision. Overactive thyroid, lead poisoning, atypical depression, mania, anxiety, sleep deprivation and a range of psychiatric illnesses are some of the potential causes. These conditions can all be addressed by treatments without using drugs.

These are the issues that need to be researched before resorting to any response from pharmaceutical companies who will push any pill that earns them money.

Thioridazine, sometimes used to treat hyperactivity in attention deficit disorder, was one of the frequently used early medications that was halted because it was later found to have heart-related side effects. This was only learned after children had been given the drug.

Doctors themselves are adding to health risks. For example, atypicals are a new generation of antipsychotic drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration for adult schizophrenia and bipolar disorder (manic depression). None of the six drugs — Clozaril, Risperdal, Zyprexa, Seroquel, Abilify and Geodon — is approved for kids, but doctors can prescribe them as "off-label" medications. Why are doctors allowed to prescribe these drugs to children as long as the drugs do not carry the original label? Why do doctors prescribe these to children knowing they are not approved for children?

Research on how the drugs affect children is sparse, and experts increasingly are concerned that the drugs are being prescribed too often for children with behavior problems, such as attention-deficit disorder and aggression.

In a USA Today interview, John March, chief of child and adolescent psychiatry at Duke University School of Medicine, prescribes the drugs to kids in some cases of serious illness when he thinks the benefits outweigh the risks. But he says prescribing them for behavior problems alone may be a mistake. "We have no evidence about the safety of these agents or their effectiveness in controlling aggression," he says. "Why are we doing this?"

A study of FDA data collected from 2000 to 2004 shows at least 45 deaths of children in which an atypical antipsychotic was listed in the FDA database as the "primary suspect." There also were 1,328 reports of bad side effects, some of them life-threatening. Are parents so desperate to get relief from the burden of a hyperactive child that they resort to drugs with these side-effects?

The FDA's Adverse Events Reporting System database captures only 1% to 10% of drug-induced side effects and deaths, "maybe even less than 1%," says clinical pharmacologist Alastair J.J. Wood, an associate dean at Vanderbilt Medical School in Nashville. So the real number of cases is almost certainly much higher.

We need to break free of conventional medicine’s dependence on drugs. This whole culture of take a pill to solve your problems needs to be stopped. Pharmaceutical companies placing ads pushing their latest miracle drugs need to be banned. The FDA needs to more thoroughly test these drugs before they are prescribed.

There are several alternative treatments to medication for the hyperactive child, but be absolutely certain you consult only a registered and qualified practitioner.

Osteopathy:

Osteopathy treats the musculo-skeletal system. It concentrates on gentle manipulation to restore and maintain the proper functioning of the muscles and bones. It is particularly useful for treating problems with the ligaments and spine. It improves lymphatic drainage and breathing which, in turn, can be very effective in treating hyperactivity in children. Cranial osteopathy also relieved many of the symptoms of hyperactivity such as headaches, dizziness and lack of concentration.

Nutritional therapy:

Much of our modern diet is highly refined and lacking in essential vitamins, minerals and nutrients. Nutritional medicine aims to redress this balance by adding essential nutrients to the diet in such a way that the body is able to absorb and utilize these nutrients. A nutritional therapist will recommend a system for diagnosing and eliminating any foods that are likely to trigger hyperactive behavior in the child.

Homeopathy:

The homeopathic approach is growing in popularity as an alternative treatment for hyperactivity in children. Homeopathy is gaining recognition in the conventional field of medicine and has been subject to many clinical trials. Homeopathy works according to the principle of “like cures like” where substances that cause certain symptoms can also be used to cure them. However, used in conventional doses, these substances would be toxic, so homeopathy dilutes them to miniscule levels in order to make them safe but, at the same time, retaining their effectiveness. Because homeopathy adopts the holistic approach, the child’s medical history, lifestyle and temperament will be assessed before treatment is prescribed. Hyperactivity is considered a complex problem by homeopaths. It is, therefore, essential that you consult a recommended practitioner rather than trying to treat the child yourself.

Acupuncture:

Acupuncture is based on the principle that well-being depends on the balance and flow of energy (called “Qi”) through the body. The acupuncturist will correct the flow of Qi by inserting thin needles into certain points in the body. Because some children are afraid of needles (acupuncture needles, incidentally, are painless), massage or acupressure will be used instead. However, most acupuncturists treating children will only use the finest of needles and only leave them in place for a few seconds. The acupuncturist will take a full history of the hyperactive child and then concentrate on the points where he or she believes the energy channels are being blocked in the individual child. Acupuncture has proved a very effective remedy for hyperactivity in children.

Herbal medicine:

Herbalism is probably the oldest form of medicine. Whereas modern medicine often relies on extracting one active ingredient, herbal medicine uses the whole plant. Herbalists often point out that symptoms may get worse at first but then a marked improvement will follow. Many herbal remedies are particularly relevant to the treatment of hyperactivity in children. A herbalist will be able to pinpoint the remedies which are best suited to the individual personality of the child.

At least try some other form of treatment before subjecting your child to the crap shoot that pills have become.

Where Are We Going?

Do we have a direction for this country? What are America’s goals? After living (stumbling) under what passes for “leadership” these days, I feel this country is more lost today than ever.

Actually, we are headed in several directions. We are headed for a second great depression, according to economic experts; we are headed for war with Iran, according to U.S. News and World Report and according to the rhetoric that our paranoid, war-hawkish ‘leaders’ are spouting; we are headed toward environmental disaster, according to environmentalists everywhere; we are headed toward third world status, according to our downward trend on the list of information technology rankings. Our increasing illiteracy, our increasing waistlines and our vanishing chances of having a workable and equitable healthcare plan has us decreasing in the rankings of the world’s healthiest nations. We are leading the world in number of incarcerated individuals, a dubious honor at best.

In a recent poll, 70% of respondents to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey say things are going badly for this country.

We are told as individuals that we should have a 5-year plan, a 10-year-plan, and beyond. Can anyone tell me what those plans are for this country?

The U.S. has become more dangerously polarized through our blind impassioned pursuit of terrorist (that we certainly have had a hand in creating) and we are antagonizing them even more with each sip of oil from foreign wells.

As a nation, we have lost our sense of what is right and wrong, fair and unfair, just and unjust. George Bush’s gang thought it right that we destroy a nation to protect our interests and access to oil. They thought it just to use telecoms to secretly gather information on millions of Americans in their pursuit of terrorists that, oddly enough, has not led to any arrests. They thought it fair to hold hundreds of those who they consider to be ‘enemy combatants’ for years without a trial. They thought it fair to place unqualified cronies in such high government positions as the head of the U.S. Attorneys Office, Director of FEMA, Commissioner FDA, Chair of Corporation for Public Broadcasting and Administrator of Medicare & Medicaid Services. But ask any individual you come into contact with throughout your busy day for their opinion on any of these topics and they will give you a very different version of what is right, fair and just.

Our emerging world market economy is creating an ‘every-man-for-himself’ value system. Traditional morality, i.e., selflessness, altruism, sharing and cooperation, is the glue that built our society and it is crumbling.

This is the key factor behind much of the social unrest globally, according to George Matafonov, author of a new book entitled Fire & Water: Market Morality & Civil Society. "While the threat of terrorism and multiculturalism are often convenient and easy scapegoats, the root causes of social unrest globally lie in the experiment in trying to model the moral core of society on economic theory, rather than traditional human values," said Matafonov. "While economic theory results in efficiency in competitive markets, it has no place outside the market," he added.

As humans, we have been living in societies for tens of thousands of years and have developed values and a sense of morality to enable us to live in peace, harmony and prosperity. In the space of less than 50 years, economic theory has turned all this upside down by insisting our chief value should be competitive self-interest.

Religion has taken a beating by people who lack the incentive or the inclination to give it a ‘test drive’ and by reports that prove clergy are humans. Catholic church sex scandals have become legendary. Evangelical church leaders become involved in sexual immoral conduct, tax evasion, extramarital affairs, shameless theatrics to raise money, and infighting. Christianity has taken on so many different doctrines that there is no longer one central belief. Even the idea of God holding dominion over earth as its creator is no longer acceptable to a growing number of people. Supreme Court decisions that ban recognition of God in public life have the effect of abolishing Christianity in public life and discrediting Christianity in private life. These Supreme Court decisions are driven by organizations such as American Atheists, the group founded by Madelyn Murray O'Hair in 1963, the American Civil Liberties Union and many others.

Family values are deteriorating through moral decay that allows adulterous relationships that in turn increases the divorce rate. The resulting increased divorce rate increases out-of-wedlock pregnancies that are costing taxpayers more than $112 billion annually. The unfortunate side effect of divorce is a single-parent family that is subject to a life filled with early pregnancy, school dropout, and delinquent behavior. Children who grow up without a father present, even when adjustments are made for income, are 375% more likely to need professional assistance for emotional problems, twice as likely to repeat a grade of school, and more likely to suffer a wide variety of other disorders including anxiety, peer conflict, and hyperactivity. While television and the movies gather headlines as the motivation behind teen violence, school administrators blame "family breakup" for violence in the schools. As a result of economic pressures to work longer hours or multiple jobs, children of single-parent families find themselves unsupervised. They can’t help but have feelings of abandonment even if they understand why they are left alone.

The idea of a democratically elected government has become a joke. Our elected officials are guided more by whichever corporation has the most lobbyist who gets the most attention with the most money as opposed to what the taxpayers really need in their struggle to survive. Super delegates have a disproportionate voting power and can back any candidate they want regardless of who their peers vote for.

As we search for alternative energy sources in an attempt to wean ourselves from fossil based fuel, the very symbols of what we are fighting against, big oil, is busy developing a corporate environmentalism designed to appeal to green consumers, while fighting tooth and nail any legislation that would interfere with their financial bottom line. This hypocrisy is nothing more than an overt attempt to maintain their influence, and product brand, over a society that should be focused on finding alternative energy sources.

David Suzuki, a noted environmental activist, author and host of CBC Television science magazine, published a post on guardian.co.uk on how humans have lost the vital skill of forethought. He asks why we choose to ignore the warnings from the worlds leading scientists and Nobel prize winners of the coming ecological disaster. We have the capacity to alter our current course of ‘the degradation of our very life support systems - air, water, soil, energy and biodiversity’ and yet we choose to devote our attention to ‘every antic of Paris Hilton or Britney Spears’.

All in all, this is a pretty dismal picture of life in America. As long as this nation is devoid of strong moral leadership we cannot hope to focus our many talents and our creativity towards finding equitable and viable solutions that will benefit everyone.

What lies ahead is anybody’s guess. Somehow, just making more money seems pretty unfulfilling. What do you think?

Gas Tax Holiday: Beware Politicians bearing Gifts

Senator John McCain has proposed a gas tax holiday, a ‘gift’ if you will. Every year, just before the summer driving season, someone in congress proposes just such a break to ease our economic woes. Has it ever happened? No. Will it happen this time? Let’s hope not.

The amount of federal tax collected on a gallon of gasoline is 18.4 cents, roughly 5% of the current average price of $3.38/gallon. This would save the average commuter between $3 and $4 per tank. If the average commuter fills their tank once a week, then by the end of this three month no-tax period, he/she could conceivably save $36 to $48 which is truly a paltry sum.

During that time, the federal government would lose $9 billion and more than 300,000 jobs. The federal Highway Trust Fund, which is supported by this tax, is already facing a $3.4 billion shortfall to finance much needed infrastructure repairs nationwide. The federal transportation department says every $1 billion in highway spending creates 34,779 jobs. Sure, it would help companies like FedEx and UPS who are struggling to stay profitable due to high gas prices, but saving some jobs only to lose others is not a very responsible economic policy.

McCain plans to cover this loss with money from the general fund which would add to the deficit. Also, a very stupid and short-sighted idea. It saddens me that this is the best that a presidential candidate can come up with. And of course, since this proposal is outright political pandering for votes, Senator Hillary Clinton jumped right on it. America is in for more serious trouble.

There are several major drawbacks to this ridiculous proposal. First, by making gasoline cheaper during the busiest driving time of the year consumers will only use more of it. This not only quickens our pace towards the bottom of the trough but it would have immediate detrimental financial and environmental effects by increasing the price of a gallon of gas, increasing the amount of CO2 emissions (which contradicts Senator McCain’s stated goal of reducing CO2 emissions) and increasing the profit to oil producers.

Does this still sound like a ‘gift’?

“You don’t want to stimulate consumption,” said Lawrence Goldstein, an economist at the Energy Policy Research Foundation, interviewed by the New York Times. “The signal you want to send is the opposite one. Politicians should say that conservation is where people’s mindset ought to be.”

Mr. Goldstein said that instead of freezing the federal tax, the government should help lower-income populations pay for gasoline. It would be cheaper and benefit those households that need it most.

This guys shows much more leadership quality than any candidate we are currently forced to deal with.

The United States has the lowest gasoline taxes among industrialized countries. It also has the highest gasoline consumption level in the world, nearly 25% of all gasoline consumption is by Americans. Energy experts say the two are related. Raising the tax on a gallon of gas would slow down its consumption and finally force us to think about our driving habits and force us to be more energy conscious.

Haven’t we learned yet about what they say about accepting gifts from politicians? We always pay more for it in the long run.

Protection of Privacy and Civil Liberties is our responsibility

The right to privacy is something we all expect and yet the concept is not found expressly in the Constitution or any amendment.

We assume the right to privacy is granted and protected even though we freely divulge information about ourselves on a daily basis, i.e.,

while navigating the internet our internet address can be captured to pinpoint where we live;

using credit cards, online as well as at brick and mortar stores, leaves a trail of purchases that marketers can use to tailor their advertisements towards what they think we may want to purchase;

telephone conversations and email correspondence can be intercepted which further defines who we are or what we are planning to do;

anything we do outside the home and who we do it with are all subject to monitoring by someone with the right equipment.

Accumulated information about each one of us, collected by using any or all of the sources mentioned, can be used to create a very clear profile of who we are. This information can also create a pattern of behavior that can then be interpreted, using sophisticated computer software, to predict the likelihood of future behavior and intentions.

It is no secret that our government eavesdrops on our internet activity. It should come as no surprise to learn that email correspondence in the workplace has no expectation of privacy. Surveillance cameras are becoming more ubiquitous in public places around the world.

Now, local police are advocating the use of spybots. They claim to be needed for, and will only be used for, tactical reasons during hostage situations. Homeland Security pushes for more complete fingerprinting, but only to catch terrorists. FBI wants more complete biometric data on everyone, to help catch criminals and, oh yeah, terrorists.

High-tech spy tools have become the most lusted after weapon in law enforcements arsenal of crime fighting tools. Flying drones are among the more exotic tools. These handy portable devices, complete with infrared sensors and able to fit in a backpack, will allow police to see behind barricades during SWAT actions. They will also be able to help police watch any neighborhood, any house, any person they want to.

Fingerprinting in hopes of catching terrorists is just an excuse to build a more complete profile of everyone in America. A known terrorist is not going to be caught by airport security through the use of fingerprints. Those people who readily submit to fingerprinting are least likely to be the type of people the police need to watch.

Scanners with the ability to “see” under our clothing in graphic detail will soon become common place.

How far are we willing to allow our government to creep into our private lives under the guise of combating terrorism? Who are the real terrorists here? Illegal immigration, terrorism, and criminal activity all provide our government an obvious cover for the proliferation of the latest spy devices and biometric data collection.

Most of us realize that foreigners come to this country in search of a better life for themselves and their families. As such, these people are highly unlikely to commit any crime that could result in them being deported. Of course there will always be a percentage of ‘bad guys’ in the mix, and fingerprinting them will not prevent them from crossing our borders until several conditions are met:

1) we are completely walled off and the only way in is through a tightly monitored entrance,

2) we have the ability for fingerprints to be immediately matched with a complete database,

3) the person being checked has to have already been fingerprinted.

Nothing will accurately predict future criminal behavior which is why fingerprinting is a useless exercise unless the purpose for doing so is to build a more complete profile of everyone in America.

Law abiding citizens should have nothing to fear from bring profiled by our government. But the requirement to be fingerprinted reveals a level of mistrust toward the individual by the establishment and creates a level of mistrust from the citizen being scrutinized. The few low-lifes who choose to live outside the ‘constraints’ of the rules of civilized society are the people causing law enforcement to pursue these heavy-handed measures, not in an attempt to control our movements but to remain aware of where the criminal element is at all times. The ability to ‘know’ where someone is and what they are doing is beyond human ability, therefore technology comes into play.

The issue of trust is of course at the center of the right to privacy vs. the need for personal protection issue. Police use the argument that during a SWAT situation they need a greater ability to collect more accurate and thorough information for the protection of both themselves and any citizen in the immediate vicinity. They say that remote controlled cameras offer this ability. Which is true. But I, like many others, have become weary of what police will do with these tools when not being used for SWAT actions. Who is to guarantee that these tools will not be used to ‘collect’ data on other citizens then?

Trust has eroded as a result of past incidents on the part of police against the very people they are sworn to protect. We no longer have trust in a police force that abuses its power and then is exonerated. We no longer have faith in the sincerity and purity of intentions of a police force that so readily resorts to tasering wheelchair bound or handcuffed individuals. We can no longer believe that our guardians will not use collected data for their own personal nefarious purposes.

Privacy advocates have warned of the dangers of a government collecting information on private citizens and we are beginning to see the great ‘Big Brother’ society materializing when we learn that our government is snooping through our phone records and trying to pass legislation to exclude telecommunications companies involved from liability. We can no longer expect privacy concerning employee email sent on company time. Websites we access at home on our private computers are monitored by our internet service providers. And we can’t even count on the press to inform us about what our government is up to.

We see evidence that the lack of attention to detail in performing our job duties can result in a threat to human life. Nuclear tipped missiles accidentally loaded aboard a B-52 bomber last August and flown across the U.S., electrical fuses for ICBM’s accidentally shipped to Taiwan in 2006, inspections of nuclear facilities on submarines not done resulting in false reports being submitted. These are of course the most serious examples of the infallibility of humans and how events can be purposefully triggered if the desire is there. But they illustrate how humans are prone to not take their individual jobs seriously enough to even protect their fellow man. How can we in any clear conscience give spy tools to a police force we no longer trust?

As these situations show, it is only a matter of time before some rogue individual in a security position or government office will use data collected on an individual to exert undue, unlawful, and immoral pressure on that person for their own dark reasons. This is human nature, no matter what assurances we are given that this situation will never happen, we still all know that it could and probably will.

Building a bigger, more complete database of American citizens only further erodes trust between citizens and those officials appointed to protect us. If we are willing to have complete blind faith in our protectors then watching our every move would not bother us. If the protectors would have complete blind faith in us then they would not need the ability to spy on our every move. It would be nice if such a world existed, but it doesn’t. That lower subset of humanity, the criminal, who would rather prey on the rest of us instead of putting forth the effort to become a productive member of our society, is the reason local police want spybots and why Homeland Security wants a complete profile on everyone that crosses our borders and why the FBI so fervently pursues having a complete data history on every person within our borders.

To add to the horrifying specter of our government knowing everything about us, private citizens can get their hands on our data not only though theft but through sheer incompetence of government officials. An alarming amount of data has been reported just within the past year and it has been going on for several years now. The following is a partial list (it would take up too much space here to list them all) is from actual headlines involving the personal data of millions of people:

Britain’s HM Revenue and Customs lost computer disks containing confidential details of 25 million child benefit recipients.

Half of London boroughs lost citizens’ data.

Connecticut Sues Accenture Over Lost Data.

CD of Georgia personal data lost.

More personal data lost — this time on paper.

Personal Data Lost on 650,000 credit card holders.

It is unconscionable that any individual would be so careless with other people’s personal data that they would loose that data.

I don’t like the situation that the unethical and morally decrepit morons among us have created but it’s there just the same. So, how do we respond? Do we tie law enforcement’s hands to its traditional role of being backup in case we need them, or do we allow them to become ‘proactive’ and use any method at their disposal in the name of protecting us? I don’t see how the latter scenario will make any of us feel truly safe short of embedding tracking devices into each of us and having 24/7 monitoring of our every movement and thought. That is a society that I want nothing to do with.