Not really much going on this week since it is a holiday week. Here are a few images from this past year. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

Two bombs within minutes of each other exploded at a restaurant early Wednesday in Iraq’s shrine city of Karbala, wounding at least 26 people, police and medical officials said.

An Iraqi soldier stands guard along a highway near Karbala. (AFP Photo)

The first bomb targeted diners inside the restaurant in the heart of the city, located 110 kilometres (69 miles) south of the capital Baghdad, around 9:00 am (0600 GMT), causing several injuries, police said.

However, a second bomb minutes later, after an ambulance and medics had arrived to help the wounded, caused most of the casualties.

A senior health official for Karbala province told AFP that at least 26 people had been wounded in the attacks.

Bookmark & Share

Mike Garrett from SpeedHunters.com asked me if I’d like to write a guest blog for the site. He asked if I could write something related to the Lowrider Culture. I decided to profile Lifestyle Car Club. I wrote a post complete with photos. Please visit the site and feel free to leave a comment or two! Here’s the link: SpeedHunters Dot Com

Today I had a couple of interviews and photoshoots to take care of and like most of the interviews I’ve done recently they were a lesson in the history of Lowriding. There is alot of history that has not been told and I have been fortunate to sit down and talk to some legends in Lowriding. These profiles will be in a future issue of Lowrider Magazine. I started my Sunday in the San Gabriel Valley not too far from my home.

My day ended in East Los Angeles right near where I spent some of my youth.

Check out the Downtown Los Angeles skyline in the background.

BIRDS WITH BOMBS THE MIXTAPE! DOWNLOAD IT NOW

NEW LINK (TRY THIS ONE FIRST)
DOWNLOAD HERE

AND

DOWNLOAD HERE

Song List:

1- Prelude

2- Boss Level

3- Birds With Bombs

4-Keys Open Doors

5- D.O.K.

6- Broken Bells

7- Tiny Red Piano

8- Squidward

9- Fly Paper

10- You Dont Know Me (DR.TEKNO RMX)

ENJOY

I made some tuna salad last night (packaged tuna, chopped apples, raw cabbage, almonds, olive oil, dill, pepper, cayenne pepper), which I love to eat straight from the bowl.

But then I looked into my fridge and saw those cute little mini peppers sitting in there, the red, yellow, and orange ones, and thought: Why don’t I scoop some tuna in there and make little tuna bombs?

So obviously I did. And it was great. Like a jalapeno popper or a mini sandwich, minus all the bad stuff both of those include plus the satisfying crunch of a pepper mixed with the spicy-sweetness of the tuna.

You could definitely do this with Arun’s Deli Meat Ceviche and any hollow-in-the-center-veggie. Like if you carved out the center of zucchini or cucumber and made boats.

Uses: easy snack, cutesy appetizer, Thanksgiving savior.

YUM!

or: Let’s all be honest, you would rather find boas than bombs in a closet

or: fun fact, gays can smell terrorists…but sadly they can’t tell us

Right now in Washington D.C., there are investigations in to the recruiting policies and monitoring of enlisted soldiers as to their religious affiliation in congruence with the mental stability of our soldiers. These hearings and investigative panels, of which there was one Thursday led by I-Joe Lieberman, are the direct result of the alleged actions at Fort Hood on Nov. 5, 2009, by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. Investigations are going to delve deep, eventually, and massive overhauls of privacy rights for soldiers and further screening in recruiting as well as monitoring while in the armed forces will come, doubt on this can be none. These findings of the panels will be arbitrary at best on an isolated incident that has been categorized as ‘terrorism’ before the blood even dried in Texas. What will come out of this fear is policies put in place to allow for the government to monitor and spy on it’s servicemen and women…but what if they find something they don’t want to? How does this new ideology that will come from the aftermath of this tragedy affect the long standing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy put in place under Bill Clinton? Reconciling our fear of attack and the consequences of full disclosure run contradictory leaving us in nothing less than a moral and legal stalemate.

I foresee that within six months from now panels will find that monitoring the personal e-mails, contacts, phone records, and personal interactions of its soldiers as necessary to the further security of this nation. It will be stipulated that extensive background checks will be called for, and recruiting standards are going to come under close scrutiny as to allow for enough soldiers, but not let in too many ‘questionable’ individuals. What will occur is that each soldier will have to agree to give up their civil liberties, which to some extent they already do, but they will now be under full discretion of the Patriot Act and every facet of their lives will be a matter of military record and available for review at all times. Psychological exams and test as well as regular counseling and drug testing will be mandatory. Before enlisting every soldier will be subject to military, and the finding of the hearings will also dictate an outside department, the FBI, to fully screen every single candidate. Becoming a solider will now become a moment of being all that you can be, and then letting the government see exactly what that is, intimately.

Will this be the right path? Time will tell, as will public outcry or protest from soldiers, but it will happen. The nation is terrified at the possibility of the very idea that some ‘terrorist’ could possibly infiltrate US military defenses, weapons stockpiles, et al, and as with 9/11 we will allow for the government to take any measure to assure our safety. No doubt that incidents against Muslim servicemen and women will go up, we probably won’t hear about it though. As a minority, especially of middle eastern decent, they will be profiled and most likely scrutinized further than anyone else; they will be unfairly profiled, this is America and that is our knee-jerk reaction. Sorry. What will follow will be a Muslim witch hunt that will both embarrass and weaken the strength of our branches of the military. The shifting eyes from soldier to soldier started on that day, don’t pretend they didn’t, and now we are weary of one another which leads to fear which leads to incidents. Indeed.

Well, how does this effect those in the military who are under a prime directive put forth by the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States? What happens to those men and women serving, or wanting to serve, in the military who have something to hide because it is the law? For those in the military who must keep their sexual orientation and relationships secret, don’t you think that with enough snooping for terrorists we might uncover a few gays? “Sir, Private Jones is not a terrorist, he’s a queen, sir.” What then? It kind of defeats the purpose of a law that stipulates that a serviceman will not initiate a conversation on the nature of a soldiers orientation, but what if an investigation does the leg work for him? Then we have a primary issue, once it is known the soldier must be discharged, right? That’s the law. Wait, but we weren’t looking for gays, we were looking for terrorists. Look the other way then, but wait, that soldier is a gay…back to the shifty eyes.

What these investigations present us with a need to take a good, long look in the mirror as a nation and decide where we draw the line. The end result of this incident, the longest standing victim besides those killed, injured, and effected, will be the policies of full disclosure and something I think will be called the ‘Servicemen Activities/Identity Transparency’ act, or “say-it” (SA/IT, get it?), the antithesis of the DADT policy of today. This will, of course, require that we have full disclosure from all troops on all subjects, but this might be hard without first ending the DADT policy of the last nearly 17 years. Installing this policy shift without repealing DADT will be one slippery slope indeed, you cannot have two orders that are so utterly contradictory; they are both compromised by the presence of the other. We, as a country cannot have a full investigatory policy of all servicemen and women without first coming to terms with what we may find and how to deal with it. Has anyone even given a thought as to how we would arrest, imprison, court martial, sentence, or just discharge, a serviceman or woman…if they were either gay or a terrorist? How the hell would either of those proceedings go? We need to, before putting in new policies, decide about the end game and what the consequences might be if we got our wish and started outing people.

It is clear that there is a fundamentally philosophical issue at hand, “How much do we want to know to feel safe?” We are shining the light of scrutiny in to the closets of our citizens, and some of those closets may be quite flamboyant; that is not a military issue boa. What will happen to our puritanical beliefs and ‘ignorance is bliss’ mentality when we find answers to questions we weren’t asking? We want safety, but we don’t want [to know about] queers; what the fuck do scared, bigoted lawmakers do!? Well, I think in the interest of national security after this singular isolated incident of ‘terrorism’ by and ‘islamic extremist’ that is not the fault of policy or of any specific layer of governance, that we need to DO something; or at least appear to do something. We will rape the civil rights of soldiers and sodomize personal privacy for the good of the nation. However, this cannot go on while DADT is in place. I think I speak for everyone that, in this matter of relative safety, we can’t have two standing orders that contradict themselves; “Say It” and “DADT” cannot both be followed, and in the interest of the people’s feelings of safety, we might want to get over ourselves and be open about…everything, so as to further secure this country. I can’t speak from experience, but I would rather the man in a foxhole next to me be a confirmed ‘gay’ than a suspected ‘terrorist’, but that’s just me.

President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have decided to bring five of those who plotted the 9/11 hijackings to Manhattan to stand trial in federal court.  

One of those who will be tried is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks and someone believed to have been involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombings, the 2000 aborted plan to attack Los Angeles International Airport and other atrocities. This decision carries the clear message that the War on Terror should never have been considered a real military action against a foreign entity, but a police action not unlike the War on Drugs or against organized crime.  

It’s a critical difference, and the reframing brings with it potential psychological whiplash in the American people, many of whom will now be left trying to sort out whether they were misled in a dramatic, wholesale fashion by a former President, or by this one.  Either conclusion is anxiety-provoking. The decision to try these men in civilian court also, however, has other, very serious psychological implications for many millions of Americans.  

First, the families of those killed in the 9/11 attacks will see those who orchestrated the murders of their loved ones lawyered-up, dressed up, with their own supporters potentially in attendance or demonstrating in the streets.   Their futures will be determined not by the military form of justice that takes into account the way facts are gathered on a battlefield in times of war, but by whether they were read their Miranda rights prior to being arrested and whether they were treated by the standards extended to American citizens who are arrested for armed robbery or rape.  

They will contemplate for months or years the very real possibility that those who destroyed their families will go free on technicalities. Beyond the families of victims, the entire population of Manhattan and the cities immediately surrounding it can be expected to experience symptoms consistent with the reawakening of the terror of September 11.  They will see legions of security forces deployed in their streets.  They may have a vague or more acute sense that the city is again being attacked—or that it will be attacked during the trials.  They may avoid certain areas of the city, or avoid the city entirely—for prolonged periods of time.  They may experience low mood, insomnia, flashbacks or nightmares.  

 Hopefully, the Obama Administration will team up with New York state officials to offer specialized psychological services through schools and churches and synagogues and police departments, in order to stave off some of the inevitable psychological fallout.  These services should be deployed soon and should be available for a significant period of time after the trials have concluded. Beyond Manhattan and its neighboring cities, beyond New York State, the nation as a whole will, of course, be in a prolonged state of hypervigilance (another hallmark of posttraumatic stress), wondering whether terrorists will see Manhattan during the 9/11 trials as the target to end all targets, the ultimate canvas for a bloody monument to Jihad.

Forget anything like normal consumer patterns or tourism during the trials.  People don’t tend to flock to prime targets for dirty bombs. It’s going to be ugly psychologically for Americans, even if the 9/11 defendants are ultimately convicted.  

If they’re found innocent due to violations of their civil rights, something vital in the fabric of the American psyche—the sense that we can protect one another and rely on our government to help us do it—could begin to fray.

Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatry correspondent for FOX News Channel and a New York Times bestselling author. His book, “Living the Truth: Transform Your Life through the Power of Insight and Honesty” has launched a new self-help movement including www.livingthetruth.com. Dr. Ablow can be emailed at info@keithablow.com.

Doctors report “unprecedented” rise in deformities, cancers in Iraq
By Larry Johnson

November 16 2009

As we in the news media like to say, violence has “abated” in Iraq.  For example, on Monday it was reported that 16 people – including a member of the country’s main Sunni political party and several of his relatives – were killed by gunmen. And a parked car bomb exploded in a market in Kirkuk, killing five people and wounding seven others.

It’s sad to say that the death of 21 people is not too bad, but this is a country that, since the U.S. invasion, often saw a daily civilian death toll topping 100.

But there is another, more insidious violence that is on the rise and will likely continue to rise for generations to come.

The Guardian.co.uk (has and excellent Video) reports that doctors in Fallujah are dealing with up to 15 times as many chronic deformities in infants and a spike in early life cancers that may be linked to toxic materials left over from the fighting.

The report said, “Neurologists and obstetricians in the city interviewed by the Guardian say the rise in birth defects – which include a baby born with two heads, babies with multiple tumours, and others with nervous system problems – are unprecedented and at present unexplainable.”

Actually, this rise in birth defects has been reported on – by, at least a handful of journalists – for years. Iraqi researchers and doctors – for years – have documented the rise of birth defects and cancer primarily in southern Iraq where most of the fighting took place in the first Gulf War. With the second war in Iraq, it seems obvious that the problem is spreading. Depleted uranium has been singled out as the most likely cause.

Depleted uranium, which is used for armor-piercing shells of various sizes, is a highly dense metal that is the byproduct of the process during which fissionable uranium used to manufacture nuclear bombs and reactor fuel is separated from natural uranium. DU remains radioactive for about 4.5 billion years. Many governments have outlawed the use of DU as weapons. The United States has not.

In 2002 and 2003, I researched the effects of depleted uranium in Iraq for stories in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer newspaper.

In the 2002 story:

“Although the Pentagon has sent mixed signals about the effects of depleted uranium, Iraqi doctors believe that it is responsible for a significant increase in cancer and birth defects in the region. Many researchers outside Iraq, and several U.S. veterans organizations, agree; they also suspect depleted uranium of playing a role in Gulf War Syndrome, the still-unexplained malady that has plagued hundreds of thousands of Gulf War veterans…”

At the Saddam Teaching Hospital in Basra, Dr. Jawad Al-Ali, a British-trained oncologist, showed me photo albums he kept of dead and deformed infants that he believed were linked to DU. There were photos of infants born without brains, with their internal organs outside their bodies, without sexual organs, without spines, and the list of deformities went on and on.

In the 2003 story:

“Doctors in Iraq say the number of cancers and birth defects may be devastating.

“‘This is the right time for active support to help prevent the catastrophic effects of the bombing,’ said Dr. Alim Yacoub, dean of the Al Mustansiriya Medical School in Baghdad.

‘“If there isn’t a centralized health plan soon, the consequences could be devastating,’ said Yacoub, the foremost Iraqi authority on the effects of DU. Yacoub has tracked the rise of cancer in Iraq for years, and places the blame squarely on DU.”

An Iraqi scientist, Souad N. Al-Azzawi documented the entire history of DU in Iraq and its devastating effects on the people there, in a presentation to the Kuala Lumpur International Conference to Criminalise War in October. Al-Azzawi, who was forced into exile from Iraq, has devoted many years to her work, at considerable personal risk.

So, the problem isn’t that the rise in cancer and birth defects in Iraq is “unprecedented” or “unexplainable.”  The problem is the United States government, and other governments, won’t do anything about it.

Source

They need help the hospitals nor the Doctors can handle all the patients.

The Americans caused the problems and yet will not help them. The children are in desperate need of much more medical help.

Deformed Babies in Fallujah: Iraq Letter to the United Nations

Young women in Fallujah in Iraq are terrified of having children because of the increasing number of babies born grotesquely deformed, with no heads, two heads, a single eye in their foreheads, scaly bodies or missing limbs.

In addition, young children in Fallujah are now experiencing hideous cancers and leukaemias. These deformities are now well documented, for example in television documentaries on SKY UK on September 1 2009, and on SKY UK June 2008. Our direct contact with doctors in Fallujah report that:In September 2009, Fallujah General Hospital had 170 new born babies, 24% of whom were dead within the first seven days, a staggering 75% of the dead babies were classified as deformed.This can be compared with data from the month of August in 2002 where there were 530 new born babies of whom six were dead within the first seven days and only one birth defect was reported.H.E. Dr. Ali Abdussalam Treki
President of the Sixty-fourth Session of the United Nations General Assembly
United Nations
New York, NY 10017October 12th 2009Your Excellency,RE DEFORMED BABIES IN FALLUJAH Doctors in Fallujah have specifically pointed out that not only are they witnessing unprecedented numbers of birth defects but premature births have also considerably increased after 2003. But what is more alarming is that doctors in Fallujah have said, “a significant number of babies that do survive begin to develop severe disabilities at a later stage”.  As one of a number of doctors, scientists and those with deep concern for Iraq, Dr Chris Burns-Cox, a British hospital physician, wrote a letter to the Rt. Hon. Clare Short, M.P. asking about this situation. She wrote a letter to the Rt. Hon.Douglas Alexander, M.P. the Secretary of State of the Department for International Development (a post she had held before she resigned on a matter of principle in May 2003 ) asking for clarification of the position of deformed children in Fallujah.She received a reply dated 3rd September 2009 (two days after the Sky TV broadcast of 1st September 2009 ) from a junior minister, deputy to The Secretary of State, Mr. Gareth Thomas MP, Duty Minister, Department for International Development. In his reply he denies that there are more than two or three deformed babies in Fallujah in a year and asserts that there is, therefore, no problem. This is at wild variance with reports coming out of Fallujah. One grave digger of a single cemetery is burying four to five babies a day, most of which he says are deformed.Clare Short passed us a copy of this letter. It bears a remarkable similarity to three other written answers we have received over a four year period, in regard to child health and the use of depleted uranium. All these letters are based on lies and an aim to confuse the recipients. In her autobiography “Honorable Deception?” Clare Short says “The first instinct of Number 10 (Downing Street) is to lie.”

We regard the mendacity of Mr. Thomas’s letter, and of the other letters we have received, as extremely serious. These letters do not deal with minor matters of corruption, or taxes, but do deal with the use of armed forces and deadly weapons.

The use of certain weapons has tremendous repercussions. Iraq will become a country, if it has not already done so, where it is advisable not to have children. Other countries will watch what has happened in Iraq, and imitate the Coalition Allies’ total disregard of the United Nations Charter, The Geneva, and Hague Conventions, and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Some countries, such as Afghanistan, will also come to experience the very long term damage to the environment, measured in billions of years, and the devastating effect of depleted uranium and white phosphorous munitions.

If, as we say in our letter to the Duty Minister of the Department for International Development, the UK Government clearly does not know the effects of the weapons it uses, nor, as a matter of policy, does “it do body counts”, how can the UK Government judge whether it is conducting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan according to International Law, especially in terms of “proportionality” and long term damage to the natural environment? How can the UK know about the illegality of the weapons systems it sells on the international market, such as the “Storm Shadow” missile, if the very Department of the Government that is supposed to assess the deaths and medical needs of children and adults in Iraq is not telling the truth.

We request from the United Nations General Assembly the following:

1. To acknowledge that there is a serious problem regarding the unprecedented number of birth defects and cancer cases in Iraq specifically in Fallujah, Basra, Baghdad and Al – Najaf.

2. To set up an independent committee to conduct a full investigation into the problem of the increased number of birth defects and cancers in Iraq.

3. To implement the cleaning up of toxic materials used by the occupying forces including Depleted Uranium, and White Phosphorus.

4. To prevent children and adults entering contaminated areas to minimize exposure to these hazards.

5. To investigate whether war crimes, or crimes against humanity, have been committed, and thereby uphold the United Nations Charter, The Geneva and Hague Conventions, and The Rome Statute of The International Criminal Court.

Please find enclosed a copy of our letter to Mr Gareth Thomas, dated 12th October 2009, and his letter to The Rt Hon Clare Short, M.P. dated 3rd September 2009, and enclosures relating to this matter.

Yours faithfully,

Dr Nawal Majeed Al-Sammarai ( Iraq Minister of Women’s Affairs 2006 -2009)

Dr. David Halpin FRCS (Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgeon)

Malak Hamdan M. Eng in Chemical and Bioprocess Engineering.

Dr Chris Burns-Cox MD FRCP

Dr. Haithem Alshaibani (Environmental Sciences)

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown (Author and Journalist)
Nicholas Wood MA, RIBA, FRGS

Enclosures to follow by surface mail:

1:  Copy of Sky Television Documentary 1 September 2009 “The Deformed Babies of Fallujah”:

2:  Copy of Sky Television Documentary June 2008 “The Deformed Babies of Fallujah”.

3:  Frieder Wagners’s film “Deadly Desert Dust” 2006.

4:  Report by doctors in Fallujah 4 March 2008 ” Prohibited Weapons Crisis”

5:  Film the “Dying children of Iraq”,compiled by Nicholas Wood.

6:  US Army briefing on the use of White Phosphorous in Fallujah on “Shake and Bake Missions”

7:  Report “Who Can Forgive the Crime of using Depleted Uranium Against Iraq and Humanity” by Dr Haithem Alshaibani, September 2009 .

8:  Written Answer by Mr Hilary Benn, Secretary of State, Department for International Development to Parliamentary Question. 10 March 2005.

9:  Letter by Mr Hilary Benn, Secretary of State, Department for International Development to The Independent, 20 January 2007, in reply to the 98 Doctors’ letter to the Prime Minister.

10:  Letter by Rt.Hon. Des Browne, M.P. UK Former Minister of Defence to Rt. Hon. Tony Benn, November 2008

11:  Black Country Coroner’s District ( Sandwell, Dudley.and Walsall: ) Coroner’s Report into death of Stuart Raymond Dyson. 18 September 2009.

12:  Calculations of expected child abnormalities in a city the size of Cardiff or Fallujah using UK statistics , David Halpin FRCS

Letter from Mr Gareth Thomas M.P. Duty Minister, Department for International Development, 3 September 2009 to Rt. Hon. Clare Short M.P.

Source

Sept 1, 2009

By Lisa Holland

Sadness Of Fallujah’s Sick Children

A doctor in Iraq has told Sky News that more and more children are being born with deformities in Fallujah, a city heavily bombed by the US in 2004. Lisa Holland’s report contains pictures of children with severe medical conditions and deformities. Video Here

This is beyond sad. These poor children and parents should never have had to go through this.

The under taker at a Fallujah cemetery  says he buries 4 or 5 newborns every day and most are deformed.

This is compliments of the US invasion.

This is a crime against Humanity and a War Crime to say the very lest.

Words cannot describe, the despair these parents must feel.

This of course happens everywhere the US goes, this is the trail of horror they leave behind. This is caused by the Weapons they used and they sell these weapons to other countries as well.

The soldiers who have been there, can also have children with these types of deformities.

This Video Released in 2007

An award winning documentary film produced for German television by Freider Wagner and Valentin Thurn. The film exposes the use and impact of radioactive weapons during the current war against Iraq. The story is told by citizens of many nations. It opens with comments by two British veterans, Kenny Duncan and Jenny Moore, describing their exposure to radioactive, so-called depleted uranium (DU), weapons and the congenital abnormalities of their children. Dr. Siegwart-Horst Gunther, a former colleague of Albert Schweitzer, and Tedd Weyman of the Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC) traveled to Iraq, from Germany and Canada respectively, to assess uranium contamination in Iraq

The Hidden Massacre of Fallujah

This is the terrible testimony given by Jeff Englehart, veteran of the war in Iraq. “I have seen women and children burnt bodies – the former U.S. soldier added – phosphorus explodes and it creates a cloud. Whoever is within 150 mt is dead.” Some witnesses have seen a rainfall of burning substances of different colors that were burning people when hit and even those who were not hit had problems breathing”, told us Mohamad Tareq al-Deraji, director of the center for human rights studies in Fallujah.

This is the result of weapons used by the US

What the US didn’t want anyone to know.

Whether it be Napalm,  White Phosphorous or another new Weapon of Mass Destruction the end result it horrifying.

These are the Victims of the US.

This is beyond cruel.

This is beyond a war crime

This is the US inhumanity

Who has and used Weapons of Mass Destruction? Not Iraqis.

How can anyone do this?

This is the true face of war.

Those responsible for this must be held responsible.

Americans must know what their Government did.

Imagine how you would react to this type of horror

How can anyone in the World think this is OK?

How many must die before we Say NO TO WAR?

More pictures of Babies Born in Iraq with Deformities

We also have Children Like this little girl and there are many more like

Mouna.

Mouna’s Story : An Iraqi Girl Struggles to Walk Again

The five-part series  chronicles the story of Mouna, a young girl who suffered severe injuries in Iraq, she learned how  to walk again, on artificial limbs with the help of MSF/Doctors Without Boarders, surgeons and physiotherapists in Amman, Jordan.

It was a very long, painful road for a little girl to travel.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Related Articles

Why: War in Iraq and Afghanistan

There’s a ticking time bomb in Serbia, where doctors have reported a sharp increase in cancer deaths among locals and claim this could be linked to NATO’s use of depleted uranium shells during the 1999 bombings. NATO bombings: Aftermath takes toll on Serbia, now left with DU Poisoning

Just recently in China which isn’t so far off a baby with two heads was found abandoned. When it comes to war pollution the wind blows and it goes.

War “Pollution” Equals Millions of Deaths

More Videos on Depleted Uranium

Look, we know that ALL of you are in too great a tizzy about the impending release of the new Twilight film to concentrate on Answer Me This! Episode 118, but try. Just for us. Even though we’re not all sparkly and bouffant:

This week we speak of:

Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey
Smeg fridges
the True Blood theme tune
Helen’s dad vs. Peter Pan
the colour of Jesus
Lois Duncan
stupid terrorists
Dermot O’Leary
Red Dwarf
and
fun things to do in Birmingham (UK, not Alabama).

Additionally, Olly dreams of walking through a sewer with Dan Ackroyd and a Ninja Turtle; Helen swoons over a Come Dine With Me contestant who seems to have OCD and too few hobbies; and Martin the Sound Man brings up The Master and Margarita as casually as Helen’s baby nephew brings up his lunch. Just in case you were wondering, he is THE CLEVEREST MAN IN THE WORLD. Try to forget it. He won’t let you.

Please, as ever, send in YOUR QUESTIONS – via answermethispodcast@googlemail.com, Skype ID answermethis or the question line 0208 123 5877 – and if you want to tell us about your funny or far-fetched nickname like Smeg did this week, please do so in a comment upon this post. But it has to be a good one, OK? “My name’s David but my friends call me Dave” will not cut it! You’re competing against an adult man named Smeg, remember.

See you next week!

Helen and Olly

Add this episode to:

Subscribe with iTunes • Listen to episodes • Question Archive • FAQ
Facebook • Twitter • Merch Superstore • YouTube Channel

Atop the mountain she stood and noticed.

A man in his forties announcing their arrival,

With guns & artillery, bombs & horses,

Their sole mission to take her captive.

‘Come, princess, we must leave

Before they capture & destroy thee.’

What brings me here? Questioned she,

Only sleep, princess, the deepest of the deep.

Heartbreak Warfare - John Mayer

Tabbed by Júlio Mendonça da Costa
Email: juliomendonca_@hotmail.com

Standard Tuning

Chords used by John (you can play the full notes, it doesn't matter, but i think it
better this way):
A     x02220
D/F#  2x023x
F#m   2x422x
F     1x3213
C     x32013
G     320033

OBS : To the big E string John uses the tong to hold the note or kill it (x).It's cool,
more pratical.

OBS2: The parts with A : you can switch the freets played in the B string, 0, 2 or 3
usual) and on the G string too, 2 (usual) or 4.

OBS3: The parts with D/F# : you can switch the freets played in the B string, 0, 2 or 3
usual).

Make yourself comfortable to choose the combinations you like, John himself doesn't have
pattern.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A D/F#
A D/F#

A
Lightning strikes
                           D/F#
Inside my chest to keep me up at night
A
Dream of ways
                         D/F#
To make you understand my pain

A
 Clouds of sulfur in the air
Bombs are falling everywhere
     D/F#
It's heartbreak warfare
A
 Once you want it to begin,
No one really ever wins
   D/F#
In heartbreak warfare

       F#m        A
If you want more love,
               D/F#
why don't you say so?
       F#m        A
If you want more love,
               D/F#
why don't you say so?

A
Drop his name
                         D/F#
Push it in and twist the knife again
A
Watch my face
                       D/F#
As I pretend to feel no pain

A
 Clouds of sulfur in the air
Bombs are falling everywhere
     D/F#
It's heartbreak warfare
A
 Once you want it to begin,
No one really ever wins
   D/F#
In heartbreak warfare

       F#m        A
If you want more love,
               D/F#
why don't you say so?
       F#m        A
If you want more love,
               D/F#
why don't you say so?

     F       C G      (check the time for this passage,G to C, it's
Just say so...         quick comparing the time you stay on F)

F    C G
F    C G
F    C G

F
 How come the only way to know how high you get me
      G
is to see how far I fall
F
 God only knows how much I'd love you if you let me
      G
but I can't break free at all.
         A
It's a heartbreak...

A
 I don't care if we don't sleep at all tonight
           D/F#
Let's just fix this whole thing now
A
 I swear to God we're gonna get it right
       D/F#
If you lay your weapons down
A
 Red wine and ambien
                                D/F#
You're talking shit again, it's heartbreak warfare
A
 Good to know it's all a game
                                D/F#
Disappointment has a name, it's heartbreak warfare

A D/F#  ...

Well its 1 week away from the release of “Birds With Bombs”(DROPS 11-22)  Mixtape is released! These past few weeks have been really nice music wise. I’ve been able to get projects done and even start new tracks that will be on the mixtape.

The mixtape is going to be mostly orignal tracks, a few sampled beats, and 1 remix of a Ben Folds song. Even though my main direction of production is Electronica and Dance, theres still a little bit of something for everybody.

Recently i’ve gotten the inspiration to start sampling songs. I think im getting a hang of it. I sampled 2 songs on this project just to get my feet wet.

The first song I sampled is Paper Planes by M.I.A. The second song is sampled is Thank You by Jay-Z. Credit for the Jay-Z sample goes to my homie Warren Peace. He sparked the idea, this was just my take on it.

The Names of these two beats are Called “Fly Like Paper” and “Keys Open Doors”. Be hearing for ‘em on the mixtape.

Last night G-Shock and Mister Cartoon held a media event to launch the Mister Cartoon G-Shock watch that is on its way to retailers now. The event was held at SA Studios in Los Angeles and there was media present from all over. Here are a few photos.

A few of my favorite G-Shocks!

The Mister Cartoon G-Shock

Mister Cartoon meeting with the media.

This one is up for auction at the Juxtapoz Magazine site. Bidding starts at $500. Its one of a kind!

Some of the people in attendance.

I will put more photos up later!

Today’s suggestion for changing the world is to form a ‘Food not Bombs’ group. The theory behind such a group is to gather food from various sources (fresh vegetables running out of shelf life, etc) and to seek to feed the local hungry people – such as the homeless, poor, etc.

These groups also protest against war.

This suggestion is also not for me – but not because I don’t like the idea. It is a great idea and one others may like to pursue. Visit the web site below for more information:

www.foodnotbombs.net

Yesterday something called The Views of Exeter was pushed through our letter box.  It’s free and, according to the front it is issue 2 of a ‘magazine. . . covering all points of the city.’  As a far as I can work out some enterprising people have started putting this little publication together and selling advertising space.  It’s a pretty unremarkable magazine, but it does have some nice full-colour photos of Exeter past and present.  There’s not much of great substance in it, but hey, it was free and I’m sure many people will glance through it just as I did.

I picked it up at around 6:53 this morning thinking to ease myself into my day with tea and some very light reading.  I certain didn’t expect to find anything that would really grab my attention or that would be worth mentioning, but then I came across a gem on the second page in the ‘Your Views’ section.  This ‘magazine’ doesn’t have a website so I can’t capture the letter and post it here.  Instead, what follows is a word for word, line by line transcription of what I read that preserves both the original punctuation and capitalisation as well as spelling (note a / symbol indicates a line break):

Dear Editor,

The carbon footprint is going/ Through the roof in Exeter/ with all the traffic lights,/ they seem to grow week on/ week, when it rains it seems/ Another set grows, it must be/ Something in the soil!.  Congestion gets worse but when/ They fail there is no congestion./ Is this a conspiracy to create/ Congestion then they might bring/ In congestion charges.  Already a/ Through main road has been/ diverted around the back streets with/ traffic light that delay and hold up/ traffic, if it goes any slower/ Enforcement Officers could be/ booking us all for parking!/ Dave-’White Van Man’

Oh my, how do I respond appropriately to this kind of semi-coherent, near gibberish?  Is there an appropriate response?  I’ll start by admitting that for the first six lines or so of this letter I was looking at it in completely the wrong way because of where the line breaks occur.  I know that an editor of some sort broke the lines as they are to fit the page layout, not Dave, but combined with his peculiar sense of which words to capitalise and treatment of normal marks of punctuation as optional they had a strange effect on me.  I’ve been reading a lot of poetry recently and in my groggy state I realised I’d actually been thinking that some bright spark had written in to this free newspaper in verse form.  My guess was that it was either some sweet old man or lady or a 13 year-old with literary aspirations.  There was something innocent and naively poetic about the image of traffic lights growing in the rain.  Clearly I can be a prize-winning idiot. . .

I have to admit that I haven’t noticed huge numbers of new traffic signals springing up around the city.  There have been some as well as a number of temporary lights around but thelatter have been up to allow  works to be carried on water mains and to alter the roads to ease congestion.  I’m 90% sure that I know which ‘Through main road” Dave mentions and yes, the diversion is a pain.  It’s only temporary though and once the works underway are done the diversion and lights will be removed.  I too have had the opportunity to make my way across town on more than one occasion when traffic signals have failed and, at rush hour at least, the result is a crawling chaos of angry drivers and who don’t fighting for right of way.

Normally I love a conspiracy theory.  I’ll pick-up any half-baked book that features the Templars, or Masons or any other group no matter how awful it looks and give it a real chance.  Even completely unbelievable conspiracy theories are, at the very least, good for a chuckle.  I just can’t get behind the idea of a conspiracy to introduce a congestion charge though.  The idea doesn’t even have lunacy to recommend it.  It’s just divorced from reality in an uninspired and uninteresting way.  Exeter just isn’t big enough to make a congestion charge economically worthwhile for the council, not even with the traffic snarls that we do get.

The idea that traffic lights are the big contributor to Exeter’s carbon footprint is a bit more intriguing although, again I think it falls short of being convincing.  Obviously having lights on all over the city does, somewhere along the line, produce a noticeable amount of emissions.  So does having street lights that burn all night long as do the illuminated Christmas decorations that will shortly be switched on.  That being said I can’t see how traffic signals could be a bigger problem than all the people making journeys alone in their cars, especially all those Vogue edition Range Rovers I see people driving.  In some sort of Jeremy Clarkson inspired logic the writer of this letter seems to be attempting to use the idea of global warming as an argument to let people drive more.

As I’ve mentioned it is not the case that congestion disappears when the lights fail.  There are some bad lights, but Exeter is an old city with roads that weren’t built to accept the volumes of traffic that it now experiences so there are some delays as roads are modernised and people simply have to sit and wait.  And they do. . . last weekend I drove through town and the displays indicated all of the car parks were full.  Cars were queueing up outside them so every time one vehicle left another could take its place.  If that’s not real congestion I don’t know what is.

Plymouth on the other hand is a breeze to drive around.  It has nice wide roads and big roundabouts.  It even has special lanes and signals for buses that mean you’re less likely to get stuck behind a bus than you are in Exeter.  Plymouth has these features partially because it was bombed to pieces during World War II in a way Exeter wasn’t creating a rather blank slate during its reconstruction.  Maybe that’s what the council should do here in Exeter, blow everything up and start again.  In fact, towns all over the world could use Exeter’s transformation as a model for their own.  We could even have a slogan, something along the lines of “A greener world and less congestion through explosives and traffic light removal.”  I think I might go start a campaign. . .

A phd student, LTC Mike Fenzel, commented on an and article, “Send 40,000 Schools to Afghanistan” by Nicholas Kristof from the NYTimes. NYTimes then gave this comment its own headline and page. In his comment, LTC Fenzel, who is studying at the Naval Postgraduate School in CA, comments how he believes education to be a more effective counterinsurgency effort, with a skinnier price tag. He served two tours in Afghanistan where he urged for the expansion of education.

An excerpt: “This three-year program [to train teachers and expand education] cost us [the battalion] $359,000, about the cost of one 2,000-pound bomb, yet dramatically more powerful in a counterinsurgency effort.”

Here is LTC Fenzel’s comment: “Schools vs. Guns in Afghanistan”

What an interesting and creative way to look at counterinsurgency.

Grace and Peace,

DJR

This week sees the release of the remaining T-shirts from our Holiday 09 collection, including a selection of logo-driven graphics such as Collage, Hodge Podge, and MMX. More conceptual graphics include Wash, a literal and lighthearted look at the phenomenon of brainwashing; Raisins, a reference to the tasty little megastars of a famous Californian advertising campaign; Palmy, based on a vintage travel poster; and Dead Men Wear Plaid, which is a timely flip on the poster art for an old Steve Martin movie. Available this Thursday at the THLA and THSF stores.

Excuse the casual nature and relatively short nature of this post. it is being texted from my personal phone. all further posts likewise will be
marked with the following annotation: #mobile# which should clear up any misconceptions in the future. working on the audio, yodelin kerry christensen is sending me audio and the crystal method may be on the show!!! – b.o.f. – t0mmy aka dw merritt, owner, sunday morning animation

Was the use of atomic bombs against Hiroshima and Nagasaki solely to bring World War II to an end?

Since the 1960s the controversial decision to use atomic bombs upon Japan has been debated. Traditionalists such as R.Frank and R.Newman claimed that the bombs ended the war and saved thousands of American lives single-handedly. Revisionists like G.Alperovitz claimed that there were other factors that contributed to Japan’s surrender, diminishing the A-bombs importance and bringing the necessity of the bombs into question. The debate continues to this day, with an extreme polarisation of traditionalist versus revisionist opinion. It will be shown that the A-bombs were the sole factor in bringing Japan’s surrender, that other factors put forward by revisionists were not influential in Japanese government. A key concept to understand first is the Japanese devotion to the emperor.

The idea that Japanese people and, more importantly, Japanese leaders, were devoted to the imperial family is key to arguing that the atomic bombs were the sole reason for Japan’s surrender. Surrender was not going to be a possibility given the devotion to the emperor and to the war. The US was facing an enemy of which only one organised unit would surrender in the entirety of the war^[2]_, willing to die to preserve the imperial family. The historian R. Newman points out that the emperor had to direct the Japanese ministers twice to accept the Potsdam Declaration (unconditional surrender). Even then there was an attempted coup by prominent officials to destroy the surrender broadcast^[5]. Newman argues this was telling of the attitudes prevailing throughout the war, that typical Japanese persons were of no psychological disposition allowing for surrender on conventional grounds. Newman is not a psychologist, but a historian, and it could be argued he could not make such a judgement as a result. However, corroborating evidence from historian R.Frank strengthens this view, stressing army leaders were the dominant force in government and that (based on diplomatic intercepts), until the two A-bombs, they were still confident they could force “heavy losses in [Ketsu-Go]”83, a plan to inflict heavy US invasion losses, attaining better surrender terms as a result. Both Frank and Newman wrote in the wake of the Smithsonian Controversy, 1993-1995, where an exhibit of the Enola Gay aircraft (delivered one of the A-bombs) reignited debate. Organisations, including the US Air Force and veteran soldiers, argued that the exhibit had a revisionist slant on events, that the atomic bombs were being downplayed⁹⁰. Both historians thus seem to be writing within the context of a defensive action on the traditionalist viewpoint. This doesn’t make these historians unreliable, but suggests they should be used with some caution as evidence. They both wrote perhaps specifically with the goal of defending the mainstream (traditionalist) viewpoint of contemporary society, and could be argued to be operating within the constraints of popular (social and political) acceptance. Criticism may also lie in Newman’s backround. Newman fought in WWII as a US soldier. From the Smithsonian Controversy we know that veterans of the war hold the position typically that the atomic bomb saved their lives as the war ended only days after both bombs were dropped. It could be argued that Newman came to his interpretation of events with a passive subjectivity moving him towards supporting the bombs. However, as an author of several other historical books, including the topical “The Enola Gay and the Court of History”, demonstrating a solid backround in the history of the topic, suggests he is likely to have balanced his views without bias from his US nationality or career.  In any case this devotion to war of Japanese military diehards would mean it would be the A-bombs alone which would persuade them of the need to surrender.

Revisionists claim that Japanese high-level government officials were effectively pressing for peace, and thus the A-bombs were not the sole factor in the surrender. G.Alperovitz argues Japanese officials consistently made surrender offers in the lead up to the bombs, and thus the atomic bombs were limited in importance to surrender. He points to diplomatic intercepts the Americans received, “Foreign Minister Shigemitsu has instructed Ambassador Sato to find out whether Russia is willing to assist in bring about a negotiated peace”^[6]. This is genuine evidence of peace attempts but its credibility is weakened because it does not represent the view of the entire Japanese government, these men were politicians and not the military ‘diehards’ who held meaningful power in government. Thus the view that these were serious attempts can be challenged. Alperovitz uses the post-war United States Strategic Bombing Survey (USSBS) report extensively to support the idea that the Japanese were “Seeking… some way to surrender”^[8] and that this reflected the general will of the Japanese government. What he fails to note is that the USSBS report was highly selective and limited in scope. The authors interrogated only two high-level officials, neither were fanatical army leaders. R.Newman argues the report was subjective in form of rivalry between Airforce and Navy interrogators, “the army airforce wanted to hear…conventional bombing brought about surrender, navy officers that surrender was caused by the sea blockade and naval aviation”⁹¹. R.Frank strengthens this view, arguing that the reports were compiled “in the midst of conflicts over service roles and budgets”⁹². Thus Alperovitz’s dependence on USSBS reports weakens his own reliability. In fact the Japanese were nowhere near officially offering surrender. The peace party in Japan did not have the strength^[9] to overcome hardcore army ministers like Admiral Toyoda and General Anami, of the ‘Big Six’ (the Cabinet). R.Frank states “The big six never agreed on terms”^[10]. This seems particularly true when analysing diplomatic intercepts. Soviet Ambassador Sato, in a reply to Foreign Minister Togo said “If the Japanese nation is really faced with the necessity of terminating the war, we must first of all make up our minds to terminate the war”^[11]. This significantly strengthens Frank’s argument. The government was still dominated by diehard military leaders, who wanted continuance of the war, ensuring the preservation of the Emperor (which US unconditional surrender terms did not guarantee). The cabinet were divided between the army and peace advocates (like Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal Kido). They were in no position to seriously offer surrender. Even those favouring peace wanted, as historian M.Hastings put it, “Unacceptable terms,” including preservation of the emperor, retaining Manchuria, and the right to prosecute their own war criminals^[12]. This differed greatly from the unconditional surrender formula outlined, and demanded by the US public. Hastings, one of the most recent writers (2007) on the atomic bombs, makes use of the most newly available evidence. Material was declassified in 2005, including intercepts pertinent to the diplomatic situation in Japan, suggesting the government were in no position to surrender56_, which strengthens his interpretation over earlier writers like Alperovitz(1995). This new material drew Hastings towards the conclusion that peace negotiations were to fail. Furthermore, Hastings is a member of the revisionist movement, the fact that he accepts peace negotiations were doomed to failure lends considerable weight to the traditionalist side of the debate. As a result we can conclude that political peace moves were never to succeed, that only the A-bombs could persuade military diehard leaders to submit.

A further factor argued to have played a role in Japan’s surrender is the threat of US invasion on the Japanese homeland. The revisionist J.R.Skates points to the fact that whilst the Japanese had a large military presence in Kyushu, most of the troops were “green”^[23] (inexperienced), thus an invasion was viable. Skates writes with the intention of arguing that the invasion of Japan would have been successful. This narrows the scope of his argument, as it discusses solely physical military obstacles, discounting key factors, like the inability of political leaders to make peace whilst power lay with military figureheads, thus his usefulness is weakened. Alperovitz points to the fall of Okinawa, April 1945. This led to the collapse of the Koiso government, replaced with Premiere Suzuki. Alperovitz argues that the government would have been susceptible to another Okinawa-equivalent shock through invasion, tipping the balance of power into the peace party’s hands (particularly in light of the more open-minded premiere)²⁴. This is not real evidence to support the argument that Japan was approaching surrender before the atomic bombs. Revisionists do not consider that the Japanese were aware they would ultimately lose the battle for Kyushu. Japan’s military leaders had planned a rapid, decisive battle lasting 2-3 weeks^[26], suggesting that the Japanese were looking for an opportunity to gain better surrender terms than unconditional surrender (not victory). They would do this by inflicting unacceptable losses on US forces. The idea of this battle undermines Skates and Alperovitz’s argument, Japan would not surrender whilst they [the government] still believed conditional surrender was attainable. As M.Hastings said, “the A-bomb…rendered invasion redundant.”^[33] If anything, the threat of an invasion on Japanese homelands made surrender less likely. It only served to stiffen military diehard resolve in a decisive battle which they irrationally believed would achieve better peace terms for Japan.

Another factor revisionists argue had an influence in Japan’s surrender was the policy of blockade and bombardment. Some people believed Japan could be resource-starved into submission, and therefore the A-bombs impact upon surrender is somewhat diminished. By targeting merchant shipping and railway networks many military figures, including Admiral King, believed Japan could be choked for resources, to the point where surrender was unavoidable63. J.Skates argues the policy was destroying Japan’s ability to fight. He points to a Joint Intelligence Staff report claiming the policy would render the Japanese navy “impotent” and “virtually neutralize” the airforce, reducing army combat ability to “only a few months”^[34].  Skates’ book is specifically arguing that an American Invasion was a viable alternative to the bombs, and his history as a Colonel in the US Army might suggest his book favours the army positively, placing doubt on integrity. Alperovitz follows the same lines, pointing towards another Joint Intelligence Staff report concluding “Japan is even more dependant than Great Britain upon imports from overseas”^[35].  This is a credible judgement, Japan’s merchant navy was almost completely destroyed^[36]. Alperovitz and Skates make a poor choice in sources, however. Skates uses General Arnold to suggest Japan would surrender after being “pummelled” with “1,651,000 tonnes”^[37] of bombs. Alperovitz uses Commander E.J.King to argue “the dilemma [Operation Olympic] was unnecessary…the effective naval blockade would…have starved the Japanese into surrender”^[38]. Skates states Arnold at the time wanted to separate the air force from the army, and thus had an interest in claiming the air force led to Japan’s capitulation⁹³. Skates goes on to point out that King, a naval supporter, believed General MacArthur was trying to win the war by himself through an invasion, intentionally cutting the navy out of the loop⁹⁴. Both men had reasons to cooperate, the Navy wanted a larger role in Japan’s defeat than the army, and the air force wanted independence from the army. This suggests both sources may be subjective, and damages their credibility as a result.

Traditionalists argue blockade and bombardment had little effect upon the Japanese, and thus the A-bombs maintained sole credit for Japan’s surrender. Hastings argues that “Armadas of Allied bombers had been…killing civilians in hundreds of thousands over three years”^[39] without bringing surrender, and this would not change. Most traditionalists accept the policy of blockade and bombardment would have brought about eventual surrender, but the policy has to be set in context. R.Frank acknowledges that the policy would have placed severe strain on Japan, pointing to Tokyo which imported 97% of its rice^[40]. However, he argues the policy would take years^[41] to force surrender, likely, given the levels of indoctrination within Japan. The fact that Frank balances his views, yet still comes to this conclusion adds weight to his argument. R.Newman goes further, arguing Japan had sufficient reserves to allow the continuation of war well into the future, pointing to a Joint Target Group report which suggested Japan had reserves to match total ammunition production under “favourable conditions in one year”^[42]. Newman’s argument is complimented by an investigation from T.R.H.Haven who suggested that the contemporary Japanese average diet of 1793 calories per day was sufficient^[43]. Haven is an expert resource analyst, awarding considerable weight to Newman’s own argument. Perhaps Skates is right in claiming blockade and bombardment would “break the will of the people”^[44] but this is irrelevant, for it was military diehards who were in control. Conventional bombing and blockade was having little political effect, but would lead to the potential starvation of millions^[45], the atomic bomb on the other hand would kill thousands and bring about surrender in a matter of days, taking sole credit for Japan’s submission.

The final factor possibly involved in forcing surrender was the Russian invasion of Japanese-occupied Manchuria, that the invasion of the previously neutral Russians was such a shock to Japanese leaders that surrender followed swiftly. Alperovitz argues the Russians were a primary concern for Japanese leaders, and were thus behind the ultimate surrender of Japan. He writes specifically to argue that the Russian invasion caused Japan’s surrender, using this to support his strong anti-A-Bomb beliefs. His writing lacks balance in the debate, possibly as a result of his strong opinion on A-bombs, suggesting a level of subjectivity. His argument has some clear flaws. He argues military diehards within the Japanese cabinet were still hopeful of Russian neutrality^[46], and as a result, a Russian invasion would translate into an “extraordinary political-military shock”^[47] for those leaders like General Anami and Admiral Toyoda, forcing them to “realise the inevitability of defeat”. Alperovitz argues that this would give the peace party (being Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal Kido and Prince Konoye) a new advantage with which they could sue for peace. He points to several facts. First, 34 hours after the Hiroshima bomb, Japan still “urgently sought clarification of the Russian position”. This suggests that the Japanese deemed the Russians a larger threat than atomic weaponry, raising the possibility that Japan would have surrendered without the atomic bomb. He strengthens his argument with MAGIC intercepts whereby Foreign Minister Shigemitsu directed Soviet Ambassador Sato to “sound out her[Russia’s] feeling about the continuance of the neutrality pact”^[48] This could be credible evidence, given that orders came from high-level ministerial positions. Foreign Minister Shigemitsu was not, however, a military diehard. It is therefore arguably weaker evidence than first appears, since only military leaders had real control over Japan at the time. Without direct evidence from these leaders it is hard to estimate the government’s true feelings regarding Russia. Alperovitz’s second fact is that military leaders claimed to be too busy to meet following the first bomb, only meeting following Russian entry into the war^[49]. This evidence is weak; it could be interpreted either way. Perhaps military leaders were unaffected by the A-bombs, or perhaps it was because they did not know what they had been hit by, investigating the unknown weapon used. It took several days for teams of scientific investigators to fully assess and report the large-scale damage that the bomb incurred which could easily explain their delay in meeting. The traditionalist side of the debate centres around the fact that the Japanese had already accepted Soviet entry into the war was imminent and therefore the “extraordinary political-military shock” was diminished. Historian E.J.Drea argues “the Japanese had no illusions about an eventual Soviet invasion”^[50]. Drea is a recognised expert in Japanese communication intelligence throughout the war, suggesting his conclusions were thoroughly researched. His point is strengthened with evidence from a forecast to European Japanese Attachés by the Vice Chief of the Imperial Navy reading “If the opportunity presented itself, the Soviets would enter the war against Japan in the latter half of 1945”.^[50] This evidence’s credibility is strengthened as it originates from an influential military, not political, leader (unlike Alperovitz’s intercepts). As events turned out, the forecast was correct. Thus it cannot be argued the Russian invasion was the shock factor that brought Japan into submission. The real underlying issue regarding the Russian invasion is that (according to J.Cooper) it fails to invalidate Operation Ketsu-Go^[51]. Army diehards including Anami and Kawabe implemented Martial Law in reaction to the Russian invasion, cementing their dominance in politics^[52]. At the same time Tokyo sent orders to the Kwantung Army based in Manchuria to “conduct a delaying action” which Newman argues centred around the military belief that a “decisive blow on the American invasion” was still the best option.^[53] Clearly the Russian Invasion was not a factor for military diehards. Therefore the Russian invasion was not of such importance in Japan’s surrender as Alperovitz would argue; it would take something that would invalidate Operation Ketsu-Go, the atomic bomb, to persuade the military that the Americans would not invade now that they had such a powerful weapon.

In conclusion, the fanaticism of military diehards rendered peace attempts impossible;  they wanted to continue war. The threat of American invasion only drew Japanese military leaders further away from rational thought with beliefs of a glorious decisive battle. A drawn-out policy of blockade and bombardment was not having any affect on the Japanese Government in the short term, so could not have brought about the rapid surrender the US population demanded. The Russian invasion, was equally unimportant in the eyes of Japan’s leaders, they had already forecast the invasion, had incorporated it into military strategy, and had decided the invasion would not invalidate Operation Ketsu-Go. Therefore it was the atomic bombs that achieved peace. With it the army’s belief that the US would invade evaporated, Operation Ketsu-Go was made redundant. Diehards could no longer hope for better surrender terms. “The Germans began the bombing of civilian centres; the Japanese adapted it…to it the allies responded in kind- as it turned out, with greater effectiveness.”103

90 E. Gallagher ‘The Enola Gay Controversy http://digital.lib.lehigh.edu/trial/enola/’

[5] P109 Truman and the Hiroshima Cult, Robert P. Newman, Michigan State University Press 1995

83 P97 Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, Richard B. Frank, Penguin Books 2001

[6] P23 The Decision to use the atomic bomb”, Gar Alperovitz, Harper Collins Publishers, 1995

[8] P4 The Decision to use the atomic bomb”, Gar Alperovitz, Harper Collins Publishers, 1995

[9] If the Atomic Bomb had not been used www.theatlantic.com/issues/46Dec/compton.htm, Karl Compton

[10] P227 Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, Richard B. Frank, Penguin Books 2001

[11] P225 Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, Richard B. Frank, Penguin Books 2001

[12] P487 Nemesis The Battle for Japan, 1944-45, Max Hastings, Harper Collins Publishers 2007

56 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jul/30/japan.secondworldwar

[23] P72 John Ray Skates, The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb, University of South Carolina Press, First Paper Back Edition, 2000

[26] P177 Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, Richard B. Frank, Penguin Books 2001

[33] P517 Nemesis The Battle for Japan, 1944-45, Max Hastings, Harper Collins Publishers 2007

63 P19 John Ray Skates, The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb, University of South Carolina Press, First Paper Back Edition, 2000

93 P26-28 John Ray Skates, The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb, University of South Carolina Press, First Paper Back Edition, 2000

94 P18-21 John Ray Skates, The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb, University of South Carolina Press, First Paper Back Edition, 2000

[34] P54 John Ray Skates, The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb, University of South Carolina Press, First Paper Back Edition, 2000

[35] P19 The Decision to use the atomic bomb”, Gar Alperovitz, Harper Collins Publishers, 1995

[36] P102 John Ray Skates, The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb, University of South Carolina Press, First Paper Back Edition, 2000

[37] P27 John Ray Skates, The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb, University of South Carolina Press, First Paper Back Edition, 2000

[38] P327 The Decision to use the atomic bomb”, Gar Alperovitz, Harper Collins Publishers, 1995

[39] P489 Nemesis The Battle for Japan, 1944-45, Max Hastings, Harper Collins Publishers 2007

[40] P350 Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, Richard B. Frank, Penguin Books 2001

[41] P34 Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, Richard B. Frank, Penguin Books 2001

[42] P16 Truman and the Hiroshima Cult, Robert P. Newman, Michigan State University Press 1995

[43] P38 Truman and the Hiroshima Cult, Robert P. Newman, Michigan State University Press 1995

[44] P54 John Ray Skates, The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb, University of South Carolina Press, First Paper Back Edition, 2000

[45] P38 Truman and the Hiroshima Cult, Robert P. Newman, Michigan State University Press 1995

[46] P116 The Decision to use the atomic bomb”, Gar Alperovitz, Harper Collins Publishers, 1995

[47] P85 The Decision to use the atomic bomb”, Gar Alperovitz, Harper Collins Publishers, 1995

P114 The Decision to use the atomic bomb”, Gar Alperovitz, Harper Collins Publishers, 1995

[48] P25 The Decision to use the atomic bomb”, Gar Alperovitz, Harper Collins Publishers, 1995

[49] P419 The Decision to use the atomic bomb”, Gar Alperovitz, Harper Collins Publishers, 1995

[50] P99 Truman and the Hiroshima Cult, Robert P. Newman, Michigan State University Press 1995

[51] P3 John W Cooper, The Atomic Bomb, www.johnwcooper.com/papers/atomicbombtruman.htm

[52] P289 Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, Richard B. Frank, Penguin Books 2001

[53] P99 Truman and the Hiroshima Cult, Robert P. Newman, Michigan State University Press 1995

103 Albert Einstein

Today was the Traffic CC car show at the Citizens Bank Arena in Ontario. The buzz has been going for months and Traffic did not dissapoint! The show was great! The weather, the cars, the people and the venue all came through and gave everyone in attendance a great experience. Many thanks to those I talked to today and met for the first time.  Those of you that did not attend missed out but there is always next year. Here are a few photos but there are alot more that I have to go through!

Night Shots

Sadly, this story is no relation to the fine Monty Python sketch, “How Not to Be Seen”. Since that’s funny, and this story isn’t, I’ll start with that.

There. And now you are in a good mood, right? Prepare for that mood to be destroyed!

According to a recent article in the New York Times, some idiots in Iraq have spent a great deal of time, money and effort on a new bomb-detecting technique: dowsing.

For those who don’t know, dowsing is what you see with people wandering about with y-shaped sticks looking for water. Dowsing’s ability to detect water is well-known to be non-existent. Turns out it’s ability to detect bombs is just as non-existent.

Also, here’s another fun thing: when dowsing doesn’t work, it’s the fault of the person who is doing it. Yep, blame the victim. From the Times article:

Proponents of the wand often argue that errors stem from the human operator, who they say must be rested, with a steady pulse and body temperature, before using the device.

I am really saddened that people would use this bullshit as a method to detect bombs. Frankly, you’re better off just flipping a coin to see if a car might or might not have a bomb inside. At least that gives you a 50% level of accuracy.

The last thing Iraq needs right now is to have bullshit like this dumped onto it. I hope that they quickly realize how stupid this is and go back to using real bomb-detecting methods that might actually, you know, work and stuff.