After the thwarted terrorist attacks last Christmas, only 40% of the US population is in favour of shutting Guantanamo down.

What do the other 60% stand for?

For keeping people in a prison who have not had a trial, in up to 8 years. Who were never properly accused of anything, in a court. Who are not allowed to see lawyers, who cannot talk to their families. Who are tortured on a regular basis (so much proof leaked during the last years, yet noone does anything about it). Remember the American logic: the Geneva Convention is valid in war, but the war against terrorism is not a war, therefor torture is legal.

Not only human rights organizations, but the United Nations (!) have critizied the US repeatedly (!) for the prison. They said that “not even in China” prisoners were denied access to a lawyer.

There were quite a few court decisions against the prison, like this one in 2008:

The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered its third consecutive rebuff to the Bush administration’s handling of the detainees at Guantánamo Bay, ruling 5 to 4 that the prisoners there have a constitutional right to go to federal court to challenge their continued detention. [...]
Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said the truncated review procedure provided by a previous law, the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, “falls short of being a constitutionally adequate substitute” because it failed to offer “the fundamental procedural protections of habeas corpus [...] The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times.”

Alas, they were simply ignored by the politics.

Court: “They have the right to …”
Politics: “No thanks, we’d rather not”.

What country is that?!

2002:
january – february – march – april – may – june – july – august – september – october – november – december;
2003:
january – february – march – april – may – june – july – august – september – october – november – december;
2004:
january – february – march – april – may – june – july – august – september – october – november – december;
2005:
january – february – march – april – may – june – july – august – september – october – november – december;
2006:
january – february – march – april – may – june – july – august – september – october – november – december;
2007:
january – february – march – april – may – june – july – august – september – october – november – december;
2008:
january – february – march – april – may – june – july – august – september – october – november – december;
2009:
january – february – march – april – may – june – july – august – september – october – november – december;
2010:
january – february – march – april – may – june

That is the time many prisoners were incarcerated in Guantanamo Bay are still waiting for something to happen. Something except for torture and daily humiliation.

(1) The coalition has been disagreeing on major issues for months now, and the three parties are fighting each other openly now.
(2) The German Federal President (from the Christian Conservatives) resigned for weird reasons two weeks ago. The new candidate from the Conservatives would have no problems to get elected if the whole coalition voted for him, but it currently looks like many electoral delegates from the Liberals are considering to vote for the candidate nominated by the social democrats and the green party. This would be a disaster for the government.
(3) A couple of days ago, the government announced how they want to counter the global financial crises in Germany: they decided take away money from disabled and unemployed people as well as seniors (there are other cuts as well, but this is actually the biggest one).

The protest against the government has never been that big, the Liberal party is down to 3% (from 15% at the elections), and in a re-election the current coalition would not stand a chance.

Today, there was a big demonstration against the government in Berlin. It would have been great to see 20.000 people on the streets.

But it was not.

Because stupid ******** started throwing stones, bottles and even self-made bombs at policemen. Two policemen were severely hurt and had to be operated. It is not yet sure if they will survive.

STOP IT.

You are destroying everything we, the people of Germany stand for. We are a peaceful people, and have proven this again and again recently, e.g. when the USA went to war in Iraq and Germany stood up against this war. Most people don’t agree with your violence, and you are ridiculing 20.000 people who went on the street to protest social cuts today. The police has nothing to do with this!

You are taking away our voice by taking illegal and inhuman actions. You offered the government the chance to pretend that only leftwing-radicals on their usual anti-capitalism campaign protested today, which is simply not true.

If you want to throw rocks at people, please feel free to go into some forest and through rocks at each other. Or bottles, or bombs. Noone cares.
Just get it over with.

Das Geld soll [...] durch Kürzungen im Sozialbereich hereinkommen.

Wie bitte?

Ein großer Teil der 80 Milliarden soll bei Arbeitslosen, Kindern, Rentnern und behinderten Menschen gespart werden. Bundesministerin für Arbeit und Soziales, Ursula von der Leyen, hat diese Einschnitte in ihrer bereits bekannten kruden Logik als gerecht hingestellt: ihr Ressort betrage fünfzig Prozent des Bundeshaushaltes, daher seien verhältnismäßig starke Einschnitte bei den Ausgaben für Arbeit und Soziales nur fair. Eine detaillierte Liste der Kürzungen ist detaillierte Liste der Kürzungen zu finden.

Heinz Hilgers, Präsident des Kinderschutz-Bundes bezeichnet die Pläne in einem Interview auf tagesschau.de als “skandalös” und “grausam”:

Da hat eine alleinerziehende Mutter, die gar nicht arbeiten kann, weil sie ein Baby hat und weil es in ihrer Region gar keine Kita für so kleine Kinder gibt [ein] Einkommen von knapp über 800 Euro, und davon streicht man ihr jetzt 300! [...] Das ist eine Kürzung von mehr als 30 Prozent, die einer der Ärmsten der Armen in unserem Land hinnehmen muss.

Stephan Ueberbach hat dazu einen kurzen Kommentar veröffentlicht, der mir aus dem Herzen spricht.

Liebe Bundesregierung, sehr geehrte Frau Merkel,
wen meinen Sie eigentlich, wenn Sie sagen, wir hätten jahrelang über unsere Verhältnisse gelebt? [...]
Meinen Sie vielleicht die Arbeitslosen und Hartz IV-Bezieher, bei denen jetzt gekürzt werden soll? Meinen Sie die Zeit- und Leiharbeiter, die nicht wissen, wie lange sie ihren Job noch haben? Oder meinen Sie die Normalverdiener, denen immer weniger netto vom brutto übrigbleibt? [...]
Nein, maßlos waren und sind ganz andere: Zum Beispiel die Banken, die erst mit hochriskanten Geschäften Kasse machen, dann Milliarden in den Sand setzen, sich vom Steuerzahler retten lassen und nun einfach weiterzocken als ob nichts gewesen wäre.

Ein weiterer kritischer Artikel, der sich mit den Kürzungen beschäftigt, ist bei Telepolis zu finden.

Die Krankenschwester, die ihren Kinderwunsch dank des Kindergelds verwirklichen konnte und der 60-jährige Bauarbeiter, der seinen Job verloren hat, leben über “unsere Verhältnisse”. Aber Angela Merkel und Guido Westerwelle machen nun Schluss mit dieser “Freibiermentalität” und planen bis ins Jahr 2014 stolze 80 Milliarden Euro auf dem Rücken der Bevölkerung einzusparen.

Der Vorschlag, eine Vermögenssteuer einzuführen, die mittlerweile in fast allen OECD Staaten Standard ist, und dem Staat Schätzungen zufolge ca. 25 Milliarden Euro mehr im Jahr einbringen würde, kommt für eine schwarz-gelbe Regierung nicht in Frage.

Leistungslose Einkommen (wie Spekulationen, Zinsen und Finanzanlagen) werden in Deutschland nach wie vor pauschal mit 25% besteuert – mein Einkommen hingegen mit über 40%. Eine Änderung hier würde mindestens 5 Milliarden Mehreinnahmen mit sich bringen.

Die Umsetzung dieser beiden Vorschläge alleine entsprächen 120 Milliarden Euro in 4 Jahren, verglichen mit den 80 Milliarden, die die Regierung einsparen möchte. Mit dem Überschuss könnte man wunderbar die Studiengebühren wieder abschaffen, Kinderbetreuung ausbauen und Schulen fördern.

Update:
Selbst in der CDU stoßen die Vorschläge auf Widerstand: als “sozial unausgewogen” und “nicht akzeptabel” wurden die Kürzungen vom sogenannten “Sozialflügel” bezeichnet. Bundesvize der CDU-Sozialausschüsse, Christian Bäumler, kritisierte die Pläne scharf. “Da werden diejenigen getroffen, die keine Lobby haben und sich am wenigsten wehren können.” Auch sagte er, dass Besserverdiener nicht adäquat zur Kasse gebeten werden. “Ich denke, das liegt an der FDP.” Bäumler schlägt eine Reichensteuer von 47.5 Prozent auf Einkommen ab 250.000 Euro im Jahr vor.

(Quellen: tagesschau.de, heise.de, spiegel.de)

(1)
What you might not know is that Oil Drilling in Offshore Areas has been quite a topic in the United States. There was a “longstanding moratorium on oil exploration along the East Coast, from the northern tip of Delaware to the central coast of Florida, covering 167 million acres of ocean” (source).

I say was. Because Barack Obama decided that this moratorium is really not necessary anymore.

New York Times, 31st of March 2010, in an article called “Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time”:

Drilling there has been strongly opposed by officials from both political parties in Alabama and Florida who fear damage to coastlines, fisheries, popular beaches and wildlife.

Right.

(2)
The “accident” has happened. An interesting fact is that there is a very easy way to avoid such a catrastrophe: relief wells. In Canada, these wells are required by law.

Businessweek offers an explanation:

The relief well aims to intercept the damaged hole at an angle thousands of feet below the seabed and permanently close it with heavy mud and cement.

The final solution BP offers now is exactly that: to drill a relief well. Unfortunately, this is a very complicated procedure, especially when things have gone so terribly wrong already. BP hopes they could be finished by August.

The company has made very active lobbyism to avoid the necessity of these relief wells in the United States – and was successful. Dave Levinthal, spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics, said in an interview with Reuters:

“Make no mistake: BP ranks among the most powerful corporate forces in U.S. politics. It donates hundreds of thousands of dollars every election cycle through its employees and political action committee and is routinely a seven- or eight-figure federal lobbying powerhouse each year.”

To give an example for the year 2008, there have been donations of $37.000 to members of the House Energy Committee and over $100.000 to members of the Senate Homeland Security Committee (dealing with security issues facing the nation’s oil supply). BP spent $15.9 million on lobbying in 2009.

It worked.

(3)
Some pretty … intense photographs.

Here are the results, in a nutshell:

• In over six different institutions, at least 205 children and adolescents have been abused. They have been touched, they have been molested, they have been hit, they have been raped.
• The official investigator stated that she strongly believes that the actual number of cases is “far bigger”.
• 46 perpetrators are mentioned in the report.
• Some of the delinquents were known to abuse children. When their crimes came to light within the church, they were transfered to other institutions to continue their crimes.
• An official spokesman of the church said that the reality is outrageous and brings shame and disgrace to the church.

I lied.

There was report published yesterday about abuse within the Church of Scientology.

But imagine for a second what would have happened if it were the case. There would have been a public outrage – this topic would have been all over the news. People would have been arrested all over the place – not only perpetrators, but also the hundreds of members of the church who helped to cover up these crimes. Police investigations would have been initiated, maybe Scientology would have been banned in Germany.

In truth, the investigation, and the official document released concerns the Jesuit Order of the Catholic Church. You can find a detailed report on spiegel.de.

Can we please start drawing consequences and initiate appropriate actions?

After yet another child-abuse scandal has come to light, the Oregon Province of the Society of Jesus – also called Jesuits – filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The Province includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Washington and Oregon.

Seattle University Spectator reports:

The province [...] filed for reorganization [...] in response to a lawsuit in which 63 Native Alaskan victims have alleged they were sexually abused by Jesuits and that leaders of the province covered up the abuse. More victims will be joining the lawsuit in the coming weeks, according to the plaintiff’s lawyers.

Now, let’s see how Fr. Patrick Lee, S.J., provincial of the Oregon Province views this affair:

Chapter 11 will allow the Oregon Province to resolve pending claims, manage its financial situation and continue its various ministries in the Northwest in which it has been engaged since 1841. [...] Our decision to file Chapter 11 was not an easy one, but with approximately 200 additional claims pending or threatened, it is the only way we believe that all claimants can be offered a fair financial settlement within the limited resources of the Province.

To sum up, in order to pay a fair financial settlement, the church files for bankruptcy. Right.

John Manly, an attorney for the victims:

This bankruptcy has nothing to do with finances–the Jesuits are one of the wealthiest religious organizations in the United States. This filing is about protecting the hierarchy and those who covered up for abusers.

Patrick Wall, a representative of the victims:

We believe that this is an affirmation that the Society of Jesus knowingly and purposefully dumped priest perpetrators in Alaska. The data is overwhelming. Twenty-eight priests from 11 provinces in five countries resulted in over 300 Native Alaskan kids being sexually abused from 1948 to 2001.

And that is obviously just the tip of the iceberg. Why do I get the strong impression that this is not about individuals - one priest here, another there – but about the institution Church, about the way the whole system seems to work?

See also:

• Church Humane
• Catholic Church and Paedophilia