Red Line in the Persian Gulf

.

The Eurasian Triple Entente: Touch Iran in a War, You Will Hear Russia and China

On January 12, 2012, Nikolai Patrushev told Interfax he feared that a major war was imminent and that Tel Aviv was pushing the U.S. to attack Iran. He dismissed the claims that Iran was secretly manufacturing nuclear weapons and said that for years the world had continuously heard that Iran would have an atomic bomb by next week ad nauseum. His comments were followed by a dire warning from Dmitry Rogozin.

On January 13, 2012, Rogozin, who had been appointed deputy prime minister, declared that any attempted military intervention against Iran would be a threat to Russia’s national security. In other words, an attack on Tehran is an attack on Moscow. In 2007, Vladimir Putin essentially mentioned the same thing when he was in Tehran for a Caspian Sea summit, which resulted in George W. Bush Jr. warning that World War III could erupt over Iran. Rogozin’s statement is merely a declaration of what has been the position of Russia all along: should Iran fall, Russia would be in danger.

Iran is a target of U.S. hostility not just for its vast energy reserves and natural resources, but because of major geo-strategic considerations that make it a strategic springboard against Russia and China. The roads to Moscow and Beijing also go through Tehran, just as the road to Tehran goes through Damascus, Baghdad, and Beirut. Nor does the U.S. want to merely control Iranian oil and natural gas for consumption or economic reasons.

Iran has been making agreements with several trade partners, including China and India, whereby business transactions will not be conducted in euros or U.S. dollars. In January 2012, both Russia and Iran replaced the U.S. dollar with their national currencies, respectively the Russian rouble and the Iranian rial, in their bilateral trade.

Russia to counter NATO missile shield and re-building its Navy

Russia and China Veto Western Aggression Against Syria at the UN

(Voices from Russia) – Russia and China vetoed a UN Security Council resolution on Syria that called on President Bashar al-Assad to step down. Thirteen of the council’s 15 members voted in favour of the resolution aimed to stop the violence in Syria. After the vote, Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin said, “The draft resolution that was put to a vote didn’t reflect Syria’s realities well enough and sent conflicting signals to the political forces in Syria”. Previously, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the resolution didn’t set enough demands on anti-government armed groups, and that Russia was concerned it could jeopardise the national dialogue among political forces in Syria. Earlier on Saturday, Lavrov said he and Foreign Intelligence Service head Mikhail Fradkov would visit Syria and meet with President al-Assad on 7 February. President Dmitri Medvedev ordered the visit. Lavrov didn’t reveal any details of the upcoming the visit.

Lavrov explains why Russia’s opposed to UNSC resolution on Syria

Russia and China ‘refuse’ to back Obama as they stay silent over Iran nuclear bomb threat

(Daily Mail) Nov. 14, 2011 – Barack Obama defended his sanctions against Iran claiming they have ‘enormous bite’ but wanted to work with Russia and China to find more ways of halting the country’s nuclear program. The President was speaking at a press conference after the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Hawai.

Earlier Obama has sought support from Russian leader Dmitry Medvedev and China’s Hu Jintao but both men were largely silent on the issue of Iran.

However Obama expressed confidence that both Russia and China understand the threat a nuclear-armed Iran would pose. Obama said: ‘We will be consulting with them carefully over the next several weeks to look at what other options we have available to us.’

Putin Slams Hillary Clinton for Encouraging Protesters

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

Defend Science Teachers re: Climate

In state after state, school boards for various reasons (ideological, political, religious, etc.) have objected to science being taught. We are all well aware of the struggles of biology teachers regarding their ability to properly teach their students about evolution. However, the science of climate change is also under attack from many of the same school boards, political ideologues, religious zealots and also from propaganda funded my major fossil fuel companies.

“Critics of the teaching of evolution in the nation’s classrooms are gaining ground in some states by linking the issue to global warming, arguing that dissenting views on both scientific subjects should be taught in public schools,” reported The New York Times (March 3, 2010). “Wherever there is a battle over evolution now,” Lawrence M. Krauss told the Times, “there is a secondary battle to diminish other hot-button issues like Big Bang and, increasingly, climate change. […]

NCSE’s Joshua Rosenau told the Times that he began to notice the linkage after the 2005 decision in Selman v. Cobb County. At issue was a disclaimer about evolution affixed to textbooks; although the text of the disclaimer was not religious, it was held to be unconstitutional because it endorsed the creationist view that evolution is a problematic theory lacking an adequate foundation. “By insisting that global warming also be debated, deniers of evolution can argue that they are simply championing academic freedom in general.”

Science teachers are increasingly under attack for teaching the overwhelming consensus view that (1) climate change is occurring due to global warming, and (2) Human activity, especially the burning of carbon based fuels such as coal, gas and oil which emit greenhouse gases, is the primary basis for that change. And once again, a subject that should be apolitical has become a political controversy because of the Republican party’s whole-hearted embrace of anyone who attacks the science of climate research, whether for economic or religious purposes.

Where once Newt Gingrich, John McCain and Mitt Romney were willing to acknowledge global warming the importance of addressing the issues we face that are a direct cause of our reliance on fossil fuels for energy, now it is next to impossible (outside of the state of Maine perhaps) to find a Republican politician who will publicly state that climate science researchers are not liberal dogmatic money grubbing conspirators out to destroy our economy, our nation and our very way of life. Local Republicans and fundamentalists feel emboldened to challenge climate science instruction in our schools and attack teachers:

“It’s very difficult when we, as science teachers, are just trying to present scientific facts,” says Kathryn Currie, head of the [Los Alamitos High School’s] science department. And science educators around the country say such attacks are becoming all too familiar. They see climate science now joining evolution as an inviting target for those who accuse “liberal” teachers of forcing their “beliefs” upon a captive audience of impressionable children. […]

… An informal survey this spring of 800 NESTA members found that climate change was second only to evolution in triggering protests from parents and school administrators. One teacher reported being told by school administrators not to teach climate change after a parent threatened to come to class and make a scene. Online message boards for science teachers tell similar tales …

“There seems to be a lynch-mob hate against any teacher trying to teach climate change,” says Andrew Milbauer, an environmental sciences teacher at Conserve School, a private boarding school in Land O’Lakes, Wisconsin.

These teachers simply want to present the objective factual basis for human-made climate change. Yet they are being painted as the “bad guys” by the energy industry and local politicos who see benefits from ad hominum assaults on teachers and on the researchers who discovered the link between human activity and global warming. And the result is that our children are lagging behind the rest of the world in science education:

[National Math and Science Initiative] RESPONSE [to declining science achievement among U.S. Students]: In a world that is increasingly dependent on science, we are failing to educate our kids in science. That ís putting them at risk and putting our country at risk, said Tom Luce, CEO of the National Math and Science Initiative. “We need to do much more to engage our students in the sciences. It can be done if we make science and math a priority — NMSI is already proving students can meet this challenge by using programs that have hard data showing they work.

The problem we face is that powerful and influential economic, political and religious forces do not want our children to be properly educated in science. Each of them have their reasons, but the end result is the same: Science teachers are being forced to navigate a minefield of ginned up phony controversies and put the very careers as educators at risk in order to simply teach the facts. Fortunately, at long last, The National Center for Science Education has stepped up to proved aid and assistance to our nation’s science teachers, with a program dedicated to helping teachers confront the objections of right wing attacks on their profession and their ability to teach their students about climate issues.

The Oakland-based National Center for Science Education (NCSE) has announced that it will now offer support to teachers facing resistance to climate science in the classroom, similar to their long-standing work to keep the instruction of evolution in schools. “We’ve already had a couple of calls along the lines of, ‘I know you guys do evolution, but I’ve got this problem with [teaching] climate change and do you have any suggestions for me,’” said Dr. Eugenie Scott, executive director of NSCE.

Scott says parents often argue that schools should teach both sides of a controversial scientific issue. But she doesn’t consider the fundamental conclusions of climate science to be controversial. “The idea that scientific topics that are well grounded in basic science, like evolution or climate change, should be balanced, or that all views should be taught, is not one that is very scientifically or pedagogically supportable,” said Scott. […]

The Center’s approach to dealing with these issues has always been local. “We provide information to people in communities,” Scott emphasized. “We get local people to appear at school board meetings because all politics is local and this is politics.” The Center’s staff isn’t nearly big enough to fly around the country defending climate science in 1,500 school districts. So it provides support to teachers who ask for it. “Teachers in general are conflict-averse; they just want to do their jobs,” explained Scott. Unfortunately that means that it is often easier for a teacher to avoid the issue completely than to stand up for the climate science.

Unfortunately, NCSE is a small non-profit organization that lacks the resources or media access of the Climate denial industry. An industry heavily financed by — guess who — the Koch brothers, among others.

Who’s behind a multi-million dollar campaign to seed doubt about climate change? It’s not just Exxon and Chevron—it’s also Koch Industries, an oil and gas giant that most people have never heard of, according to a new report from Greenpeace. Koch’s extensive funding of anti-climate work makes it the “financial kingpin of climate science denial and clean energy opposition,” says Greenpeace.

The Kansas-based company and its affiliates and foundations spent almost $25 million on “organizations of the ‘climate denial machine'” between 2005 and 2008, according to the report. Koch Industries and the Koch family also spent $37.9 million between 2006 and 2009. “Although Koch intentionally stays out of the public eye, it is now playing a quiet but dominant role in a high-profile national policy debate on global warming,” the report concludes.

So, Executive Director of the NCSE has made a direct appeal for our help at Real Climate, the leading climate science bog on the internet. Here is the text of the appeal that Eugenie Scott, speaking on behalf of the NCSE climate change initiative:

Long a defender of the teaching of evolution, the National Center for Science Education has recently launche

d an initiative to support and defend the teaching of climate change science.

The “support” part has challenges all its own. Unlike evolution, which easily fits into biology and other life science courses, climate science spans multiple disciplines and can fall through disciplinary cracks in biology, chemistry and physics, or appear briefly in more specialized disciplines like ecology or Earth sciences. Moreover, climate science is complex and often non-intuitive, and students (and all too often teachers) stumble over misinformation and misconceptions that are hard to overcome. Many educational institutions are wrestling with how to support climate science in the K-12 curriculum.

But the “defend” part is where NCSE will make a unique contribution. Our experience over the decades helping teachers and school boards resolve the problems that have arisen over the teaching of evolution should stand us in good stead in helping them deal with this newer “controversial science”. Of course, there are many perspectives affecting the objections to climate science education, and each requires its own response.

Some of the denial is literal (It’s not happening! The science is bad!), some of it may be interpretive (it’s maybe happening but people aren’t to blame), and some of it stems more from the implications of climate change (it’s happening and maybe humans are responsible, but someone else is to blame and/or there’s nothing I can do about it). We’re going to help teachers understand where pressure against climate science education comes from, as the first step in helping them construct a response. From the evolution education controversy we learned long ago that one does not solve these problems merely by piling on more or better science: the underlying, motivating issues must be addressed. The science is essential, but not sufficient.

Climate change education should be an integral part of science education. Students should graduate from high school and certainly college with at least a basic understanding of the foundational concepts of climate science so they can understand human activities and how they are impacting climate and other aspects of the earth system.

This is no small task, and obviously NCSE as a relatively small non-profit can only do so much. We need your help.

We have been successful because we marshal allies, like scientists, teachers, parents, and other citizens, at the grassroots. NCSE’s success over recent decades in defending the teaching of evolution has been due in large measure to scientists and others who are willing to support good science education locally and at the state level. We also need scientists to provide us with their scientific expertise.

If you are a climate scientist, please give us your contact information so we can consult with you. Also, your contact information will be helpful to us if something occurs in your region or state where we need a scientist to write a letter, testify before a committee, support a teacher, or help in some other way.

Of course, an obvious way you can help is to join NCSE, but even if you don’t, your expertise will be helpful to us.

Visit our website, and contact our new Programs and Policy Director, Mark McCaffrey, who will be helping spearhead the new initiative, to let us know you support our effort. Teachers will thank you.

Even if you are not a climate scientist you can help with your donations. I know there are many worthy causes that cry out for our attention and our money, but to my mind it is hard to imagine a cause for which support is more critical. The future of our children is at stake as well as the future of our planet. If we allow the Luddites ion the right to prevent science teachers from doing their jobs, we will surely ultimately end up with a poorer economy, a more polluted environment, a more ignorant electorate and a tragic loss for future generations of Americans who will need all the knowledge we can give them so that they can work to prevent or at least ameliorate the climate catastrophes to come.

We have all seen the beginning of such disasters in the extreme floods, droughts, storms, tornadoes, heat wave, drought and famine that stalks our planet in this second decade of the 21st Century. And by beginning I mean just that. The effects of future increases in greenhouse gas emissions will result in catastrophes far worse than any to which we have borne witness to date. Wars, famines, massive migrations and disruptions, deaths from disease and lack of clean water, or lack of water at all, storms so immense that they will make today’s seem insignificant in comparison, coastal erosion and ocean acidification — all of these things are in our future. We need our children prepared, and the way to do that is let our science teachers teach the truth about climate change without fear of losing their jobs.

So please, if you can help the National Center for Science Education in every way you can. Thank you.

Nice Going Russia and China

I hope they’re proud of themselves:

Russia and China on Saturday vetoed a Western and Arab-sponsored U.N. resolution condemning Syria’s violent repression of anti-government demonstrators, throwing their prestige and power behind President Bashar al-Assad as he intensifies a military operation aimed at crushing the 10-month-old uprising.

The Russian and Chinese stance came as a blow to U.S. and European efforts to rally behind an Arab League plan that would require Assad to step down, making way for a democratically elected unity government with a leader commading support from both the government and the opposition.

U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice tweeted her disgust and said on the Council floor: “This intransigence is even more shameful when you consider that at least one of these members” — Russia — “is still delivering weapons to Syria.”

It’s like old times. Russia and China didn’t like how Libya turned out so we get this ridiculous behavior where they can’t even condemn the brutal slaughter of the civilian population by the Assad regime.

So Much Winning

FTW:

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney likes to sing about America the beautiful, but he mainly seems interested in mining it.

And how!!

Also, mining minerals mainly benefits mining corporations and only very indirectly benefits the states in which the mining takes place. While it provides jobs and revenues for the state, it also befouls the environment. This isn’t Venezuela, and Nevadans see relatively little benefit from their mineral wealth.

Give Unto Caesar, You Numbnuts

Talk about a thin skin. The president spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday and he explained how his Christian beliefs led him to ask for a fairer tax system that doesn’t weigh so heavily on people who are struggling, and a financial system that doesn’t rip off the little guy.

“And when I talk about shared responsibility, it’s because I genuinely believe at a time when folks are struggling, at a time when we have enormous deficits, it’s hard for me to ask seniors on a fixed income or young people with student loans or middle class families who can barely pay the bills to shoulder the burden alone,” Obama explained. “And I think to myself, if I am willing to give something up as someone who has been extraordinarily blessed, give up some of the tax breaks that I enjoy — I actually think that’s going to make economic sense.”

“But for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,” the president added.

He also said the Wall Street reform he championed both “makes the economy stronger for everyone” and abides by God’s command to “love thy neighbor as thyself” because it helped people who had been hurt or treated unfairly by financial institutions.

And Obama said he believed in a “biblical call” to care for the poor and to follow “the responsibility we’re given in Proverbs to ‘Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute.’”

This so offended Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that he accused the president of thinking he is Jesus Christ and can walk on water.

“Just this morning at the National Prayer Breakfast, the president took what has always been a non-partisan opportunity for national unity and used to promote his political agenda,” Hatch complained. “He suggested to the attendees that Jesus would have supported his latest tax-the-rich schemes. With due respect to the president, he ought to stick to public policy. I think most Americans would agree that the Gospels are concerned with weightier matters than effective tax rates.”

“In 2008, the president declared that his nomination was the world historical moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal,” Hatch recalled.

“Someone needs to remind the president that there was only one person who walked on water, and he did not occupy the Oval Office.”

Meanwhile, Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) was so ticked off that he walked out of the prayer breakfast.

[Jen] Talaber, the spokeswoman for Gingrey, said the Georgia congressman – a devout Catholic — listened to “several minutes” of Obama’s remarks.

“[Gingrey] said he was disappointed, because he wanted to know what was in the president’s heart, and not just rhetoric,” the spokeswoman said. “So he said that he decided to quietly get up and leave because he felt that it wasn’t the time or the place, and that the president didn’t seem to be aware of the meaning of the breakfast or why so many people came to hear him speak. He was offended by the very tone of the speech.”

I can only imagine how offended Sen. Hatch and Rep. Gingrey would have been if they had attended the Sermon on the Mount.

Indiana Secretary Of State Guilty of Voter Fraud!

Indiana Secretary Of State Charlie White guilty of voter fraud? But… but… what about the Great and Powerful Voter ID Law (.pdf) that was supposed to prevent all that? This is the guy who is charge of elections for the entire state – the big cheese – the top banana and he cheated! Oh, the arrogance!

NOBLESVILLE, Ind. — Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White was convicted of six felonies early this morning, and consequently lost his job.

But the Republican could get it back soon.

White, 42, Fishers, plans to ask a judge to reduce his convictions – all class D felonies – to misdemeanors at sentencing. It’s uncertain whether that move would allow him to reclaim his job.

“We don’t know the right answer to that,” White said. “This is all very new.”

The little man behind the curtain is scheming even now to keep the office in Republican hands for the 2012 election.

“I have chosen not to make a permanent appointment today out of respect for the judge’s authority to lessen the verdict to a misdemeanor and reinstate the elected office holder,” the Republican governor said in the news release.

Beware – flying monkeys are on the loose in Indiana.

Saturday Painting Palooza Volume 338

Hello again painting fans.

This week I’ll be continuing with the Sedona, Arizona painting.  The photo that I am using is seen in the photo directly below.  I’ll be using my usual acrylic paints on an 8×10 inch canvas.

When last seen, the painting appeared as it does in the photo directly below.

Since that time, I have continued to work on the painting.

I started the next phase by breaking down the blue area to the rear into a number of component features.  The various buttes have been separated and a bit of color has been added.  I’l continue with this process in the next installment.  (Each of the buttes in Sedona actually has a name.  I’m not sure what these individuals are called.)

I continued into the foreground further refining the house a bit.  There is more work to do on the house but details will remain limited.  I prefer that the buttes are the center of attention.

   
The current state of the painting is seen in the photo directly below.

That’s about it for now. Next week I’ll have more progress to show you. See you then. As always, feel free to add photos of your own work in the comments section below.

Earlier paintings in this series can be seen here.

Casual Observation

In my opinion, in this case, there can’t be enough gangsterism. I don’t know why this was the breaking point instead of dozens of other lost battles in the War on Women over the last two years, but I’m glad people finally woke up and realized that the Republicans are using the majorities they won in 2010 to absolutely savage women’s rights and health. The Komen Foundation decision was the least of it.

I Guess GOP Voters Don’t Buy Left or Right Arguments About Romney’s Gaffe

Mitt Romney has supposedly been the king of fail since he won Florida on Tuesday, but Republican voters in Nevada seem not to have noticed:

Romney up big in Nevada

Mitt Romney is headed for a dominant victory in Nevada on Saturday. PPP finds him polling at 50% to 25% for Newt Gingrich, 15% for Ron Paul, and 8% for Rick Santorum.

Certainly in Nevada the Mormon vote will get a lot of attention and Romney leads Paul 78-14 with that group, which we project to account for 20% of the vote. But Romney’s dominance in Nevada goes well beyond that. He’s winning voters describing as ‘very conservative,’ a group he’s had huge amount of trouble with in other states, by a 43-34 margin over Gingrich. He’s also winning men, women, Hispanics, whites, and every age group that we track. This will be a pretty thorough victory for him….

The poll was taken on Wednesday and Thursday. Romney’s big gaffe — his national-TV rollout of that talking point about the “very poor” — happened Wednesday morning. Clearly it’s had no negative impact on his standing with his party’s voters in Nevada.

The left criticized Romney for seeming to be heartless. Nevada Republicans, being Republicans, don’t care if he’s heartless. The right attacked Romney for endorsing a government safety net at all. Now, you’d think Nevada Republicans would be quite Randian on that subject — Republicans do think government is horrifically evil. But, in my experience, Republicans do acknowledge the existence of a subset of the population called “the truly needy” — they do know there’s that kid down the street with cystic fibrosis who can’t really be described as a “bum on welfare.” But wingers think this population bloc is tiny, and further believe that anyone whose problems aren’t glaring is a bum on welfare — except themselves when they need (or become eligible for) government benefits; then it’s “Keep your government hands off my Medicare” time.

So, at least as far as the GOP rank-and-file is concerned, the concept actually was pitched correctly by Romney and his message-crafters — he just messed up the delivery. He probably alienated swing voters he’ll need in the fall, and he screwed up by igniting a media firestorm, but he didn’t say anything that offended or alienated his base.

(X-posted at No More Mister Nice Blog.)

Romney/Poupon 2012 Campaign Ad – AmericanLP

Look carefully at the :23 mark. Doesn’t that sound and look like a young Mitt Romney? Help AmericanLP tell the truth about Mitt Romney’s upper class ways. Mitt Romney is ready for His Starring role–In a Grey Poupon Commercial
Remember the old Grey Poupon TV commercials form the 70s and 80s? Where two stuffy guys in Rolls Royce share Grey Poupon mustard? I you look closely at this updated version you can spot Mitt Romney acting “in character.”