Word Wednesday.

Minatory

adjective.

1: menacing; threatening.

1525-35; from Late Latin minātōrius, from Latin minārī to threaten. “Expressing a threat, 1530s, from Middle French minatoire, from Late Latin

minatorius, from minat-, stem of minari “to threaten”.

Now Molly put an arm about its neck, and she kissed it again, this time on the long flat cheek, and yet again, on the heavy supraorbital bone, and she looked up and past it, and into Yattuy’s face, and her expression slowly changed from the utmost tenderness that she had shown to the Beast, to a grim minatory glare; gone was the fond lover, and in her place was this stern and vengeful queen.” – Throne of Darkness by Douglas Nicholas.

A Most Colourful Labour of Love.

p04lphpd

In Afghanistan, several men are at work in a smoke-blackened room. They sit between buckets of thick grey paint, working on benches made of dark grey stone. Lonely beams of white light shine through skylights in the vaulted ceiling onto stacks of clay tiles coated with a fine layer of grey dust. Monochromatic as the scene may seem, these men have one of the most colourful jobs in the world: making tiles for Herat’s Jama Masjid (Great Mosque).

This is an amazing story, and an astonishing labour of love and art, and the saving of living history. You can read and see much more at BBC.

Looking for Lunch.

A male Sharp-shinned Hawk flew by the front windows in pursuit of a sparrow, and missed, so retreated back to the pine. I got one bad shot, standing up on the shelf in front of the windows, then he took off in pursuit once more. Saw him flying a couple more times, then couldn’t see him anymore. I waited a while, and the sparrows weren’t coming back. The chickadees were messaging, but not willing to come down to the deck. Waited some more. A couple of chickadees made the mad dash, grabbed a seed and took off. A couple of sparrows landed high in the side pine. Two Downy woodpeckers showed, and slowly, more birds were coming back. Then the Downy made a panic move, and froze. Absolutely still. Minutes ticked by, not a movement. I kept scanning the side pine, but couldn’t see anything. By the time four minutes had gone by, I knew that hawk was there, because that’s an extremely long time for a bird to stay absolutely still. I opened the window, not so much as a tremor from the Downy. I climbed onto the windowsill, and finally spotted the hawk. Half crouched on the window frame, in subzero temps, I’m trying to shoot the damn thing. In the 5th photo is where you can see that I finally got his attention, and in spite of the fact I’m much larger than he is, that’s creepier than fuck. Click for full size.

1

1a

2

3

4

5

6

© C. Ford.

Let’s Compare, Shall We?

fruit-grapefruit-oranges-kiwi-lemons-limes-green-apple-174349

Credit: fourever.eu

Looking at America today, we have repubs going nuts over porn; the active dismantling of ethics and ethical oversight in favour of open corruption; and Donny “Pendejo” Trump waging twitter war with Kim Jong Un, because nothing screams “Greatness!” like two sociopaths with all the maturity of a toddler in full meltdown. And nukes, can’t forget the nukes.

Meanwhile, in Sweden, there’s a move to break the consumer cycle of “buy, it breaks, toss it out, buy another.”

Sweden’s Minister of Financial Markets and Consumer Affairs Per Bolund says we need to change that mindset.

“Part of that is making it more affordable and economically rational to stop the buying and throwing away, instead repairing your goods and using them for a longer time,” says Bolund.

He’s trying to push people in that direction through tax breaks; he’s spearheading a 50-percent tax cut for Swedes to repair items like clothes, shoes and bicycles. The new rule takes effect on Jan. 1, 2017, with a goal of decreasing waste in the world’s landfills, which are filling up at an alarming rate.

This idea — not just discarding stuff — it’s not exactly revolutionary.

A 50% tax break. I just bet that wouldn’t get the attention of Americans, nooooo. [Serious, deadly sarcasm there.]

And in Finland, they are breaking out a guaranteed universal income pilot program.

Giving people money regardless of whether or not they’re working seems to defy common sense about personal responsibility and how to boost productivity. But supporters of UBI have argued that it just makes sense as public policy, for several reasons. First, in the long run, it might be simpler and cheaper for the state to give people money than to oversee a complicated welfare bureaucracy. And it looks as if technological advances might level industries that may have seemed impervious to automation, such as truck driving: driverless vehicles will soon be out of the experimental stage, journalist Gwynne Dyer has noted.

So, America: bowl full of rotten apples.

“A lie, is a lie, is a lie.”

Dan Rather speaks to 'All In' host Chris Hayes on July 11, 2016. (MSNBC).

Dan Rather speaks to ‘All In’ host Chris Hayes on July 11, 2016. (MSNBC).

An actual journalist has weighed in on The Wall Street Journal’s declaration of not calling a lie a lie. Dan Rather did not mince words, and I am so thankful.

On Facebook, Rather blasted Baker by opening with “A lie, is a lie, is a lie.”

“Journalism, as I was taught it, is a process of getting as close to some valid version of the truth as is humanly possible. And one of my definitions of news is information that the powerful don’t want you to know,” Rather wrote.

“It is not the proper role of journalists to meet lies—especially from someone of Mr. Trump’s stature and power—by hiding behind semantics and euphemisms. Our role is to call it as we see it, based on solid reporting. When something is, in fact, a demonstrable lie, it is our responsibility to say so,” he continued. “As I have said before and will say as long as people are willing to listen, this is a gut check moment for the press. We are being confronted by versions of what are claimed to be ‘the truth’ that resemble something spewed out by a fertilizer-spreader in a wind tunnel. And there is every indication that this will only continue in the Tweets and statements of the man who will now hold forth from behind the Great Seal of the President of the United States.”

Rather concluded by warning news consumers, “You as the paying, subscribing public, can use your leverage and pocketbooks to keep those who should be honest brokers of information, well, honest. ”

Thank you, Mr. Rather.

Via Raw Story.

Ethics? We don’t need no stinkin’ ethics!

ethics

In a secret vote held behind closed doors Monday night, House Republicans voted to cripple the Office of Congressional Ethics, an independent body created in 2008 to rein in corruption and other misconduct by members of Congress.

The move was spearheaded “by lawmakers who have come under investigation in recent years,” according to Politico. Among those speaking in favor of the changes were Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-TX), who was accused by a staffer of sexual harassment, and Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL), who allegedly received “an impermissible gift when he and his wife traveled to Taiwan in October 2011.”

Under the new rules, the Office of Congressional Ethics would be renamed the Office of Congressional Complaint Review and, critically, lose its independence. It would be placed under the auspices of the House Ethics Committee, which famously has turned a blind eye to wrongdoing by members of Congress. It became clear that an independent body was necessary after scandals largely ignored by the the Ethics Committee sent several members of Congress, including Randy “Duke” Cunningham and Bob Ney, to jail.

Ooooh, a complaints department! We’re all so sure that will work wonderfully, right?

Many of the new restrictions on the body appear designed to make it easier to sweep misconduct under the rug.

The new Office of Congressional Complaint Review cannot make any of its findings public — or make any other public statement — without the approval of the House Ethics Committee.

Ah, how cozy. All the corrupt, unethical, immoral republicans now have a lovely shelter, and no one will ever tell them they are wrong.

Even if the Office of Congressional Complaint Review finds evidence of criminal conduct, it cannot report it to the police without prior approval.

Even better! If caught, they can’t be punished.

The rules also prohibit the new office from considering anonymous complaints or investigating any conduct that occurred before 2011.

Very convenient. That effectively prohibits any investigation via a complainant who might have every reason to be concerned about retaliation.

The House leadership will get a chance to prove their opposition Tuesday, when a public vote on a rules package that includes the changes to ethics oversight will occur on the House floor.

Yeah, I’m not gonna hold my breath. More American Greatness™ folks, Look Ma, no ethics! Via Think Progress.

The Conservative Rally Cry: No More Porn!

Todd Weiler (Facebook).

Todd Weiler (Facebook).

The attempt to legislate a pre-loaded porn nanny is here. Now we move on to the anti-porn crusade being spear-headed by Utah republicans, alarmed over the porn consumption stats of Utah, which are very high indeed. A couple of decades ago, I live in Utah, SLC specifically. It’s not difficult to understand why porn consumption is so very high there, it’s a state based on serious repression, and a deliberate suppression of knowledge. Naturally, Utah is going with the “won’t anyone think about the children!” whine to defend their latest draconian measures. You could seriously counter the importance of porn among children by providing proper sex education. Demystifying goes a long way in making something a whole lot less interesting. It helps if you aren’t always muttering “forbidden!” too, but I expect that’s a road too far for Utah. All that said, the majority of porn consumers in Utah are not children. They are adult, hetero men.

Now that he’s successfully declared pornography to be a public health crisis in his state, a Utah Republican wants to allow lawsuits against companies that put explicit content online.

State Sen. Todd Weiler (R-Woods Cross) sponsored a resolution that passed last year to declare the public health crisis, and he said the new bill would focus mainly on underage children and teens who become addicted to online pornography, reported the Salt Lake Tribune.

“I’m trying to kind of track the same path that was taken against tobacco 70 years ago,” Weiler told KSL-TV. “It’s not government coming in and saying what you can and can’t watch. It’s just basically a message to the pornography industry that if someone in Utah can prove damages from the product, that they may be held liable financially.”

That’s not likely, given that the whole notion of porn ‘addiction’ is a false one.

The lawmaker is working on a second bill that would close a loophole requiring public libraries to filter out adult content on wireless internet connections, and not just wired connections, and he also wants internet service providers to filter explicit content for all users, although they may opt out.

Intransitive has the best, simplest idea about the filtering question, which means it would never be implemented.

Weiler, who is an attorney, admits the first two or three dozen cases against pornographers would most likely be dismissed, but he believes they would eventually gain traction.

“I’m looking at where we can push the envelope as a state of Utah,” Weiler said. “To pretend that this is not having any impact on our youth, on children’s’ minds as they’re developing, as their attitudes towards sex and the opposite sex are being formed, I think, is foolish.”

Lawmakers in Tennessee and Virginia are considering measures that would declare pornography a public health crisis in their states, as well, and the Republican National Committee issued a warning in its 2016 platform about health concerns related to pornographic materials.

The new rallying cry of repubs everywhere, oh gods, porn! Perhaps if all republicans stopped their porn consumption, I’d bet the reduction in numbers would seriously impress them.

Via Raw Story.