A BRUSH WITH ISLAM
When you are in Washington, DC, you take a walk on the mall. When you visit London, you wait for the changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace. When you visit Istanbul, you take a cruise on the Bosphorus.
The cruise on the Bosphorus is better.
Not only do you travel on a river sea 32 kilometers long and 3 kilometers wide and blue as Turkish porcelain, you watch more than 2,000 years of history unfold before your eyes.
As is the case of just about everything in the eastern Mediterranean, the Bosphorus figured in ancient Greek mythology. As you know, the Greek gods had more problem with their love lives than any set of characters this side of "Melrose Place".
Zeus, the chief god, was also the randiest of the gods, always on the lookout for an unattached goddess or nymph or whatever. He had the misfortune to be married to Hera, who was a no-nonsense, Gloria Steinem type of goddess. Hera was always catching him at it and Zeus was always promising he would do better. (This was long before country western music, but some things never change) Anyways Hera caught Zeus with Io, a cheeky little human. In order to make things right with Hera, Zeus changed poor Io into a cow (Bos) not to be outdone (and still ticked off) Hera created a huge horse fly to bite Io in the rump and forced her to swim across the strait or crossing, (Poros). Hence the Bosphorus or "crossing of the cow."
On the human side, Greeks were succeeded by Romans who were followed by Byzantine Christians who gave way to Ottoman Turkish Moslems as the centuries rolled by. Few of these dynasties went gently into the night of history, but all left glorious art.
If geography is fate, then Istanbul has a good horiscope. Most big cities consider themselves fortunate to be located on a well traveled sea coast with a big river behind them giving them two way trade with the sea and the interior.
Istanbul is almost unique among the world's great cities in that it commanded four way trade. That is, Black Sea and river trade from the interior of Europe would go through Istanbul via the Bosphorus into the Mediterranean and vice versa. Due to the location of Istanbul on the Turkish peninsula, it was also the handiest crossing point for overland east-west trade between China and Europe
A thousand years ago, Istanbul, (then Constantinople) was the largest city in Europe. Today, Istanbul is the largest city in Europe. (Technically, Istanbul is in Asia, but as it bestrides the Bosphorus, and Turks desperately want to be considered part of Europe, we will give them that title)
The reason they consider themselves European is the result of the life work of their charismatic national leader and father figure, Kemal Ataturk (The "father figure" bit is quite literal, until Ataturk came along, Turks did not have last names. Ataturk forced everyone to pick a last name, just like Europeans: The name that he chose for himself was "Ataturk" which means "Father of Turks.")
He pushed for parliamentary democracy and the equality of women, normally unthinkable in most Muslim countries, he forbade the veil and the head to toe covering of women. He insisted that Turkish be written in latin roman script, not arabic. He demanded total Westernization. (he even forbade the turban and the fez (That funny little red brimless hat with the tassel that your uncle wears in Shriners parades.) He even had to shoot a few turban wearers to show he meant business.
Ataturk was much impressed by the American concept of separation of church and state. He pushed for a secular state, free from religious interference by Islam or any other religion. church and state. Although Turkey was (and is) more than 90% Sunni Moslem, Ataturk succeeded in putting religion back in the mosques and professionals in control of education and public life, putting Turkey well on the road to Westernization by the time of his death in 1938.
He was able to yank his country out of near Medieval conditions by the fact that he was the creator and savior of Turkey. He started out as a general in the old Ottoman Empire. When the Ottomans joined Germany in the First World War that would destroy their empire, Ataturk was able to defeat the British, New Zealanders and Australians at Gallipoli, changing world history.
After the surrender of the Ottoman Empire, the victorious allies sought to carve up Turkey and force the Turks into a small area in the primitive interior. Ataturk rallied the beaten remnants of the Turkish army and defeated the Greeks, British, and Italians in a series of close run battles, and created a nation out of rubble and an exhausted, but iron spirited people.
As a result in modern Turkey, he is revered as a secular deity. There are three things that one must never, ever ridicule in Turkey; The flag, the armed forces, or Kemal Ataturk. Ataturk's statue is everywhere. (In most Muslim countries statues and painting of human subjects are forbidden)
Joan and I were sailing up the Bosphorus on a glorious September day to a naval base where we would have lunch with the officer nephew of our host, a university professor.
After the ferry docked we walked up the landing to the gate of the naval installation. Joan and our host walked through, I followed a bit behind.
Suddenly a young naval rating with a submachine gun at port ready stepped in front of me. This is what sociologists call an unstructured situation; that is, you are not sure what is going on, but you had better stop what you are doing and evaluate.
I stopped walking and smiled reassuringly, hands outward, as one tends to do with a young man armed with a submachine gun. I spoke no Turkish, he apparently spoke no English. Eventually, Joan and our friend noticed the reason for my absence.
Our Turkish host inquired of the sailor. It turned out that I had a beard. In Turkey, a beard is the symbol of the Muslim fundamentalist fanatic. You can have a moustache, and indeed, every other Turkish man seems to have one, but you better not have a beard and try to get into a government installation. (Technically, you can have a beard, but that adornment is going to limit your job opportunities and also subject you to police interviews; and Turkish police interviews are often conducted from head to toe, as the Turkish equivalent of the American Civil Liberties Union is still in its infancy).
Now the Turks are among the most hospitable people on earth and it pains and embarrasses them not to be able to offer hospitality. A phone call was placed to the base commandant. He was sincerely sorry and crestfallen, but orders were orders. If a beard was seen walking around on the base and sitting down to lunch, it would be prejudicial to good order, even if it were a Christian beard. (It did not occur to me to offer to sing "Onward Christian Soldiers" or "Rock of Ages" to assure everyone that I was not a Muslim fanatic, but I doubt if it would have made a difference.)
Naturally, we agreed to lunch off base, and, as the Bosphorus is lined with great sea food restaurants, I secretly suspected that our new choices beat navy chow anyway.
Much to the relief of our Turkish hosts, we found the beard incident highly humorous. The Turks were most impressed when I told them that not only were neatly trimmed beards possible in the US military, but that there was a mosque in the Pentagon! (Mosques are forbidden on Turkish military bases; I am not sure if the Pentagon mosque was destroyed in the suicide attack.)
There has been a backlash against the Turkish style of separation of church and state by the strong Turkish Muslim fundamentalist faction who regard such secularism as "anti-God" and the work of Satan or Uncle Sam (Same difference). The fundamentalists find their greatest strength among the young and the poor, two big growth areas in the demographics of modern Turkey.
Understandably, modern Turkish patriots and nation builders are curious about how we Americans pulled it off. That is, how are we able to provide separation of church and state, freedom of religion, and, just as important, even freedom FROM religion. yet still have a vibrant interest in religion
Almost alone among the industrial nations of the West, we Americans are quite religious, around 90% as opposed to less than 10% in secular Europe. In Scandinavia and other parts of Europe, vestiges of the old state religions prevail and folks tax themselves to support church buildings and religious services that few attend.
Clearly, in the United States, separation has been good for both church and state. It will be up to the Muslims to convince themselves that such separation is necessary for a just and modern state. One thoughtful Pakistani Muslim remarked that "Somehow Christianity and Judaism were able to arrive at separation of church and state, Islam has not yet done this, and this is what is tearing my country (Pakistan) apart."
So, how did we do it? How did we achieve domestic peace through separation of church and state? Time, some good luck, and lots of effort on the part of some pretty wise men and women (Roger Williams, Anne Hutchinson, and Thomas Jefferson may now rise and take a bow.) Our distance from Europe and the birth of the nation during the 18th century Age of Reason helped. By 1785, Jefferson was able to get the Virginia legislature to pass his Statute of Virginia Religious Freedom, an achievement he ranked with his writing of the Declaration of Independence.
By the year 1843, the concept and benefits of the doctrine of separation of church and state was proceeding so well that the tenth President of the United States, John Tyler, could write.
(Italics) The United State have adventured upon a great and noble experiment, which is believe to have been hazarded in the absence of all previous precedent--that of total separation of Church and State. No religious establishment by law exists among us. The conscience is left free from all restraint and each is permitted to worship his Maker after his own judgement. The offices of the Government are open alike to all. No tithes are levied to support an established hierarchy, nor is the fallible judgement of man set us as the sure and infallible creed of faith. The Mahommedan, if he will to come among us, would have the privilege guaranteed to him by the constitution to worship according to the Koran, and the East Indian might erect a shrine to Brahma if it so pleased him. Such is the spirit of toleration inculcated by our political institutions......The Hebrew, persecuted and downtrodden in other regions, takes up his abode among us with none to make him afraid, and the aegis of the government is over him to defend and protect him. Such is the great experiment we have tried, and such are the happy fruits which have resulted from it. Our system of free government would be imperfect without it.
The body may be oppressed and manacled and yet survive, but if the mind of man be fettered, its energies and faculties perish , and what remains is of the dearth. The Mind should be free as the light or as the air."
President Tyler is a hard act to follow on the subject of intellectual and religious freedom, but we can join moderates throughout the world in separating religion from the personal goals of a narrow band of fanatics.
BEER AND THE BEAR
Generally speaking, bears are not good gardeners. This is particularly true of flying bears.
Given their druthers, they would much prefer to relax in a lawn chair, drink beer, and watch others garden.
This is precisely what Thunderbear was doing on a glorious July morning as I stacked rocks for a raised azalea bed in my garden in suburban Maryland.
His ample 1,000 pound eight foot frame strained the reinforced deck chair. His 28 foot wings were spread to catch the morning sunlight, which glittered off the iridescent wing feathers in a kaleidoscope of color, putting the geraniums to shame.
"If you'll put that piece of quartz on top of the Seneca sandstone, rather than on the gneiss, your dry wall will bond together much better."
"Thanks for the advice", I said grittily.
"Always glad to be of service!" the Bear said guilelessly,
As a Celestial Service Chief of Planetary Maintenance, Thunderbear saw himself more as a Director than as a Doer, an enabler rather than a heavy lifter. I can't say I blamed him. "You have to sit on the mountain to see the Big Picture" The Bear always said. (I was never sure what that meant, exactly, but he always said it.)
"Would you like a beer"? I asked politely, knowing it to be one of the world's most redundant questions.
"Always", he replied. I pulled a bottle from an ice filled cooler of major proportions.
The `Great Bear popped the top with a practiced flick of a claw and inhaled the contents of the bottle with one yawning gulp.
If a bear can be said to frown, then Thunderbear did so.
"This is not Negra Modelo." He said, referring to the dark Mexican beer that I usually served.
I agreed that it was not. "Too hoppy for you?" I inquired
"It's bitter!" He complained (Bears have a natural tendency toward rich, sweet beers like Negra Modelo)
"Actually", I said "It supposed to be on the bitter side, it's an ale. It's the hops that make it bitter. It's called Tuppers' Hop Pocket Ale. According to the label, it's "A rich harvest ale, deep gold, and extravagantly hopped."
"Do you really like it?' The Bear asked, incredulously.
"Not particularly" I replied.
"Then why do you drink it?"
"Corporate responsibility" I responded, "I always like to encourage corporate responsibility.
"Corporate responsibility?" Thunderbear asked.
"Tuppers Hop Pocket Brewing Company believes that their ale is a gift to be shared. They claim that half their profits go to programs that assist the homeless; they're sort of the Ben & Jerry's of the beer business."
"How so?" inquired the Bear with rising interest.
"Corporate responsibility, remember" I chided. "Most of the "homeless" are homeless for reasons other than letting their subscription to BETTER HOMES & GARDENS expire. Probably around half of the "homeless" are homeless because of chemical substance abuse, the main chemical substance abused being alcohol, which is one of the motivating ingredients in a number of recreational beverages, including Tuppers' Hop Pocket Ale."
The Great Bear was intrigued. "That's very responsible of them! Are there any other examples of corporate responsibility?
I thought for a moment (in fact many moments)
"Well now, "I said," I recall a somewhat negative instance of corporate responsibility.
Thunderbear furrowed his brows in bear like confusion. "How can you have negative corporate responsibility?
"Mainly by invoking "Philip Morris Logic", I responded.
"Philip Morris Logic"? The Bear queried.
"Yes. As you know the Philip Morris Corporation is one of the world's largest purveyors of tobacco products. Recently, due to unfortunate side effects of their products, and lawsuits, their domestic market has fallen precipitously. To recoup, they have mounted an aggressive sales campaign on the international market.
One of the countries targeted, Czechoslovakia, objected. They stated that tobacco products were injurious to the health of the nation and had statistics to prove it.
The Philip Morris Corporation countered with their own statistics. They said that not only would governments make a profit on taxes on the tobacco products, but statistics showed that tobacco users often died before they were able to collect their retirement pensions. Thus by killing off people who were not producing and were a net drain on the economy, Philip Morris was actually performing a public service!".
"Amazing!" said the Great Bear. "Using Philip Morris Logic, a corporation is able to do good by doing bad, and still keep 100% of its profits! Ingenious! What will you humans think of next, as a rationalization?
"I expect the potential to be unlimited", I responded. "After all, global warming and a rising sea has got to benefit people that build dikes.
THE WORLD BREAKER
Recently, a bill was introduced in the Brazilian Congress to effectively destroy the Amazon rain forest.
While Brazil does not own all of the Amazon basin, it has by far the larger part of this remarkable ecosystem.
At one time, Brazil had agreed that, for the benefit of Brazil and the rest of the world, that 80% of the present rain forest would remain intact as the largest bastion of biodiversity and one of the world's last great carbon dioxide sinks. The vastness of the forest is a significant, possibly determining factor in the degree of global warming we will experience. (We will experience SOME degree of global warming; whether we wade or swim seems to be the question.
However, this new bill turns the old law on its head, preserving only 20% of the rain forest and authorizing the destruction of the other 80%. There is a malignant urgency in the call for destruction in that the destruction would not be accomplished over the decades by uncontrolled logging as was the case in the United States. Instead, huge forest fires would be deliberately set during the dry season in the hope of destroying the most amount of forest in the least amount of time.
The excuse for this environmental holocaust is the "needs" of the "Cabulco", the Brazilian yeoman farmers. They are sort of the Daniel Boone type, always "westering", always hankering for "new land", just over the horizon. (The "old" land, having been "used up" as in the case of their Norteamericano cousins. The Brazilian pioneer farmer faced different groups of Indians than his gringo counterpart, but the result, for the Indians was (and is) the same.
Unfortunately, for the Brazilian pioneers, the soils that await them in the Amazon basin are not the rich soils of Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana and the even richer soils of Iowa. Rather, these thin tropical soils seem to turn brick hard and Sahara like after the forest cover is removed. This is not true in all cases, as the soils of the Amazon Basin have not been sufficiently inventoried to see what their true potential (or lack thereof) would be.
Our THUNDERBEAR correspondent in Brazil tells us that President Cardoso has promised to veto any bill that would devastate the Amazon rain forest (and potentially, the rest of the world.) We sincerely hope so.
On the other hand, this may be a "debt for nature" ploy, using the Amazon rain forest as a bargaining chip, agreeing, after negotiations to spare the rain forest in return for forgiveness of World Bank and IMF debts. Whatever the case, the Amazon rain forest, the Russian-Siberian taiga and the Canadian boreal forests must remain intact if we are to maintain the status quo.
To improve and progress, we are going to have to increase the world forest cover.
Indeed, the Thunderbear Sahara Reforestation Program was proposed with the assumption that the Amazon Basin forest would remain essentially intact.
If we are able to successfully reforest the Sahara as well as other major deserts of the world, we will have created a carbon dioxide sink that will allow the modernization of what used to called the Third World. Assuming that we will be planting long-lived seed, fruit, and nut producing trees, we will have the added benefit of transferring much of the World's Food Load away from annual grasses (wheat, corn, rice, millet) which are exquisitely sensitive to disease and pest to a biologically diverse set of hundreds of species of trees, which would be less susceptible to insects and blight. These "new" forests, while biologically diverse, and with a beauty of their own, would be primarily industrial and agricultural forests, "working forests" to capture a phrase from the greedheads. They would supply a considerable portion of the world's timber, fiber and food requirements, freeing up much of the world's "old" forest to become national parks and other forms of nature reserves.
But wouldn't it be immensely, prohibitively expensive and impractical? Well, yes.
However being prohibitively expensive and impractical has never stopped us from having a world war every now and then. Perhaps Henry James' famous quest for a "moral equivalent to war" would be the reforestation and afforestation of the world's deserts.
But wouldn't it be more realistic to abide by the Kyoto Accords and simply reduce the greenhouse gas emissions by the West (Meaning mainly the USA)? Yes, it would be more "realistic", but it is also against human nature. We Americans would be willing to reduce greenhouse gases (and in that case, we have not yet began to fight) but we would not be willing to reduce our standard of living.
Nor should we, as long as the option of reforestation is available.
Then of course, there is the matter of the "Developing World" (Formerly the Third World until we discovered that the Second World, the Communist Bloc, was just as rickety, poor, and corrupt, as the Third World, a fact that our benevolent Central Intelligence Agency sheltered us from all these years.)
Now according to conventional environmentalist wisdom, all these billions of poor folk just want to live a life of picturesque simplicity, perhaps be able to afford an extra ox or water buffalo, the better to be more colorful subjects of ecotourism for the likes of you and I.
Nothing could be farther than the truth. They want the same standard of living as you and I. This means a house, car, and all major appliances plus a trip to Disneyland or Mecca. Granted, not very ecologically inspiring, but that's the way the human race looks at life (That is, the sane ones; Osama Bin Ladin prefers a cave in the Afghan Mountains, not much greenhouse gas generated there.)
Leaving aside the sacrilegious nature of the idea of brown and black people aspiring to the same life (and life span) as you or I, we are faced with the aforementioned problem that Americans are not going to reduce their standard of living to accommodate global warming. (President Bush came up with the rather tendicious excuse that we didn't have to, 'cause we had all thee forests that soaked up CO2--despite appointing a Forestry chief who is apparently determined that we have considerably less forests!)
Since we're not going to back down the Standard of Living Ladder, and the "developing" folks are not going to stop climbing up, we will have no choice but to implement the Bushmaster's slogan of "MAKE THE PIE HIGHER" and establish a cheap, clean and universally available source of power to develop the "developing" world, desalinate sea water and pump it where its needed to reforest the world's deserts.
Where will we get the money? I suspect it can be found. You will recall that the mayor of New York asked for 20 billion and got 40 billion. The airlines have asked for 24 billion and will likely get it. As the late senator Dirksen of Illinois once remarked, "A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money."
NUTS
There is nothing like an apocalyptic disaster to bring the nuts out the woodwork from the idea of the disaster being foretold by the 16th century "seer" Nostradamus (who seems to have written his most recent "prophecies" in English rather than latin or his native French) to the "Reverends" Falwell and Robertson who seem to think this is God's judgement for sinful living, to the inimitable greedhead Congressman from Alaska, Don Young.
Congressman Young helpfully suggested that, despite all evidence pointing to Middle Eastern terrorists, that we not rush to judgement about poor Mr. Bin Laden, that it just might have been "radical environmentalists".
Congressman Young has been proven wrong (Has he ever been proven right on any substantive issue?)
But Hark! Your kindly editor may have to qualify that sweeping generalization. I had forgotten about the stupidity and crassness of the radical environmental movement.
Al Kamen of the WASHINGTON POST quotes Gar Smith, editor of the Journal of the Earth Island Institute as saying "We need to correct the rightist spin of the Bush administration and media. This was not an "act of war". This was an act of anger, desperation and indignation. This was not an "attack on freedom". It was a politically targeted attack on the core structures of the US military and the US dominated global financial structure. This is not an attack on US citizens but an assault on US foreign policy. The administration is trying to tell Americans that we are all targets. This is being done to draw attention away form the real targets : World Trade and US militarism".
Mr. Kamen responded by asking "Not an attack on US citizens? Might want to tell that to the spouses, children, relatives, and friends of the more than 5,000 killed."
Mr. Kamen's response was commendably mild from the stand point of professional journalism, but Mr. Smith is either a monumental SOB or a traitor or both. It is hard to consider Mr. Smith's statement as other than the classic definition of treason, "giving aid and comfort to the enemy", but even by the somewhat elastic standards of the radical Left. Smith's comments are at least in disgustingly bad taste.
POGO REVISITED
Have you ever wanted to have the decision-making abilities of a U.S Congressman? (Well, maybe not Congressman Gary Condit's decision making ability as you might wind up in serious trouble)
No, we are talking about the average roadside rest area type of Congressperson; the kind that you and I have. Nice person, extroverted, loves people and issues, skin thicker than rhino hide, not terrifyingly intelligent, but able to see both sides of problem and come up with a defensible vote for a solution.
How does he or she do it? Voting day after day on complex issues, few of which are related, how does the congressperson manage such olympian wisdom on such a wide variety of subjects?
If asked, your congressperson will stub his toe in the dust, smile shyly, and say, shucks, that he owes it all to his diligent staff and input from wise constituents like yourself. (We will ignore cynical suggestions that sacks of money provided by special interests have any influence)
So is it true that he owes his decision making ability to his wise and diligent staff? Well, not entirely. Most congressional staffers are chosen as much for loyalty as for wisdom ( Observe Congressman Condit's staffers; with the decks awash and the masts shot away, Condit's gallant crew continue to fire broadsides in defense of their boss.)
So, in the absence of a brilliant, all wise cadre of philosopher-staffers, how does your representative achieve such total wisdom?
Well, they cheat.
Perhaps that's too strong a statement.
You see, Congresspersons have access to a sort of Congressional "Cliff's Notes" (You remember them from your college days; they were yellow and black and were sold in the campus book store, and sort of pointed out to you the main points of the novel you were supposed to read and the things your professor wanted you to grasp)
The Congressional version of "Cliff's Notes" is called the Congressional Research Service. It is a governmental organization whose job it is to research and reduce complex issues into simple words and phrases that can be understood by you and I and most Congresspersons. For the truly slow witted congressperson or for those with limited time or attention span. The arguments for and against are summarized at the end of the research document with one liner statements as to what will probably happen if the Congressperson votes yea or nay on a issue.
Congresspersons can ask the Congressional Research Service ANY question, no matter how inane. For example, most congresspeople like folksy analogies; something that the folks back home can understand. The football field is a good measure for an analogy. Say, there has been a sewage spill of X number of gallons that the Congressperson is against. How deep would the sewage be (if the football field had sides)? The CRS can readily tell you
A New Jersey Republican senator was recently defeated by a wealthy Democrat who spent $30 million of his own money to do the defeating. Republicans who understandably would be for a limit to campaign spending (at least in this case), could ask the Congressional Research Service that if the $30 million dollars were in the form of Sacajawea dollar coins, and if each coin was dropped on the hapless former senator's head, would they eventually form a pile that would completely bury the 6 foot ex-senator from head to toe? (The answer is yes, and then some)
One congressman whimsically asked "How much does Manhattan Island weigh?" There are two answers to this one. The first is the weight of the island if you were to dig out the outline of Manhattan Island down to the core of the earth (forbidding number of zeros, neighbors!) The second answer is the weight of Manhattan Island of the land area above mean high tide (This is the visualization that the Congressman would use in his speech)
Best of all, the research is done by Phds who work for the Library of Congress, so the congressperson will not be embarrassed as to his facts. The CRS has a staff of 720 and an annual budget of $70 million (which sort of puts the Washington office of the NPS in the shade.)
Whimsical analogies aside, the most important work provided by the CRS is the analysis of pending legislation; the pros and cons of each bill.
Splendid! You say. Now I too can log on to the CRS website and be as omnipotent as my congressperson! Maybe I really don't need a Congressperson. Fortunately, neighbors, the Congressional Research Service understood the hubris of the average constituent. They won't let you do it.
"Not let me do it!" you bluster. "That information was obtained at public expense! I will submit a Freedom of Information Act request and demand that information, damn their bureaucratic hides!"
You might do just that, neighbor, but it won't do you any good. The enabling legislation of the Congressional Research Service forbids anyone except Congress and their staff from accessing the work of the Congressional Research Service.
"But! but! FOIA"? You stammer. Doesn't apply, friend. Congress is exempt from all laws it passes, including FOIA, and CRS is THEIRS.
At least it was until POGO came along. the Project on Governmental Oversight or POGO is the sort of Coyote Trickster of the non-governmental organizations. It is a mischievous organization that is always asking the embarrassing "Whys?" and "How comes?" of Congress and the executive branch of the government.
You will remember back in issue #233 of Thunderbear where we described POGO's investigation of the Department of Interior and oil companies. As you know, we at DOI are simple, trusting, Western folk. When the oil companies that had oil and gas wells on government land said it would be cheaper for all concerned if the DOI simply accepted the word of the oil companies as to the amount of oil extracted and thus how much royalty should be paid.
Naturally, as we at DOI are straight shootin' Westerners, we were shocked to be notified by POGO that the oil companies had not been entirely straight with us as to the amount of money that we were due. It seems the oil companies had forgotten to pay us about $500 million in royalties. Granted, while $500 million is parking change to an oil company, it seems like big money to most Interior agencies and the companies were forced to disgorge the half billion to the federal government.
This time, the merry lads and lassies at POGO are trying to force the Congressional Research Service to put its taxpayer financed information on the internet so that information gathered at public expense will be available to everyone on a non-partisan basis.
Strangely enough, opposition to provide freedom of access to CRS information, does not come from Congress (Mother of God! Even Newt Gingrich wants the CRS to share its information!) The opposition to making CRS research public comes from the CRS itself!
The excuse that CRS gives for withholding information from the public on everything from oil spills to global warming is vague, ranging from the idea that someone might sue them (almost impossible) to the idea that the information is somewhat "Privileged" (Don't tell the children!)
POGO has a champion in the Bullmoose Republican, Senator John McCain of Arizona, who is sponsoring a resolution (SR 21) in Congress that will not only force CRS to share all its information with you, but will force Congress to put the minutes of Congressional committee meetings on a website. (It is true that at the present, you CAN journey from say, Panguich, Utah to Washington, DC to sit in on your favorite committee meeting and personally take notes. However, in order to get a place to sit, you may have to do as lobbyists do; hire a messenger with a cell phone to stand in line for you.
Senator McCain feels this is bit hard on folks from Wolf Hole, Arizona, not to mention Manhattanites with their famous New York Minute.
I understand that POGO and Senator McCain will be having a press conference on this bit of sunshine legislation, but if you can't wait, you can go to thomas.ooc.gov on the internet and look up SR 21.
If this resolution passes, you won't have to become a congressperson to get smart.
DOWN MEXICO WAY--AGAIN
Joan has gotten herself another series of speaking and teaching assignments in Mexico, so we will spend the month of October down in southern Mexico. (No worry for Tom & Jerry; we have house guests that will take care of them!) If all goes well and the rains arrive at the right time, we hope to do some rafting in Chiapas along the Guatemalan border in that interesting Mayan country described by Christopher Shaw in his book SACRED MONKEY RIVER.
Naturally, all this moving around will sort of preclude an October issue of THUNDERBEAR, so we will combine it into the October-November issue and you can look for it on your electronic newsstand around the first of December.
SAFETY MESSAGE
The National Park Service is charged with the protection of the great symbols of freedom in America, ranging from the Statue of Liberty, to Independence Hall, to Women's Rights National Historical Park and Mount Rushmore; symbols of national resolve like the USS Arizona, and symbols of international trust and cooperation like Chamizal and Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park and scores more like them.
Such symbols are feared and hated by the evil fanatics who loathe the ideas expressed by these parks and monuments. These symbols will be in harm's way during the coming struggle, and by definition, so will the men and women of the NPS.
We will win, and the foes of freedom of opinion will be crushed into the dust of history.
In the interim, stay alert, be safe, and be good to one another. Our thoughts and prayers are with you. ¡Vaya con dios!