They don’t actually say American men are crap lovers. Not in so many words, that is. What they say, is that they’d be happy to do without sex for fifteen months in return for a new wardrobe of clothes.
Who are they? One thousand women spread among ten US cities. Two percent said they’d be happy to abstain for three years!
A survey of 18 to 54 year olds by the Unilever corporation revealed nearly half the women considered their favorite article of clothing gave them more confidence, and made them feel sexier, than did their man. The survey also showed that the average woman had hung onto her favorite item of clothing for longer than her longest relationship.
This has to be a very sad indictment of American men. It seems the macho – “leave the bitch at home and go hunting” brigade – are not considered by their women to be anything near as sexy as they view themselves.
Perhaps, that’s the problem.
Of course, there are exceptions to every rule – a few Kathleen Harris’s still exist:
…….to be inflamed at the caliber of Dick Cheney’s shotgun……..
But, by and large, women prefer wooing, to being left stewing, while their men are off doing the things, like canoing, that bond them to soulmates of the strictly male variety.
I do know one American woman who could never be persuaded that a new wardrobe was preferable to a good night’s loving – but she’s married to a Brit!
According to the US Defense Department it was classified; the British Ministry of Defence said it never existed. Either way it turned up today in the hands of a British national newspaper.
The cockpit videos from an attack on British troops by two US A10 ‘tankbuster’ aircraft in 2003, just north of Basra were finally displayed to the world four years after the incident that killed Lance Corporal of Horse Matty Hull, 25, and seriously injured four other serving members of the British Household Cavalry Regiment.
The quality of training given to US troops has long been of concern to the military of other nations. Despite US rhetoric lauding their military as the best in the world, American gung-ho tactics create disquiet among soldiers, sailors and airmen of other nations forced to serve in the same arena.
The pilots involved is this particular debacle were Air National Guardsmen from Idaho with no previous combat experience. Yet they were let loose over the front lines of a major war with obviously little training in the recognition of friendly forces. They did, however, have the sense to initially check back with their base, and were emphatically informed no coalition troops were in the area, before one pilot decided the orange recognition squares on the British vehicles were actually ‘orange rocket launchers’ and proceeded to attack.
Orange rocket launchers? What the Hell were they on?
“Great idea! Hey guys, let’s camouflage our rocket launchers by painting them orange!”
It was their first combat mission. Pills or no pills, they were tanked on adrenalin. A military hearing in the US found them blameless. Apparently, no-one else was charged with negligence – certainly not the base commander responsible for knowing where coalition troops were, but didn’t.
The fog of war.
The incident lay obscured for four years, until under British law it became legally necessary to hold an inquest into the death of Lance Corporal of Horse Matty Hull. The coroner had repeatedly asked the British Ministry of Defence to obtain copies of the cockpit videos from the A10’s. The MoD had hedged, made excuses; they even told Hull’s widow the tapes didn’t exist.
The US Defense Department happily admitted they were available, but not for viewing. They were “classified”. They had even given copies to the British MoD, but with instructions they were not to be shown at the inquest as they “might contain security secrets of benefit to an enemy”.
We’ve heard that many times before from the Bush administration, when documents or videos that might cause embarrassment to government have rapidly been made unavailable. It is, of course, utter rubbish.
The coroner adjourned the inquest until the matter was resolved. It now has been. Some enterprising hero with access to the MoD obviously decided to do the decent thing and purloin the tapes, sending them to the newspaper.
Now, not only the coroner and Hull’s immediate family know the full truth of what happened, but everyone else on the planet with access to a television set.
Following this viewing to the world, the US government has made the magnanimous gesture of allowing the tapes to be shown at the inquest on condition they were only seen by the coroner and the Hull family under supervision by an MoD official, and that the press were not present.
The fog of war can at times be dense indeed. It’s doubtful a war has ever been fought without allies occasionally killing each other. What stinks about this incident is the cover-up. A grieving family has been left four years without knowing how their husband and father died. Why he died.
It’s hard to decide which is most to blame – the US government, or the British. Likely, it can be shared out equally, for both are from the same lousy mold.
For all their smarmy, prayer-toting hypocrisy before the cameras, neither Bush nor Blair feels the slightest regret for those who die so politicians can play their oversized and deadly games of chess.
For that’s what it is – a game that boys play. Boys who like to pretend they are men. Whether in the halls of government or on the battlefields of Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Lebanon, the game is played till someone wins and someone loses.
In this specific case the losers were Lance Corporal of Horse Matty Hull, his family, and the two American pilots who will always live with the responsibility for his death.
Healthy skepticism, it is said, is the prerequisite of an open mind. Ill-informed opinion can lead to premature and distorted viewpoints. Not only should we expect some scientists to disagree with the bulk of their fellows over the issue of global warming, but we must acknowledge that such disagreement is important to the final analysis.
However, when scientists start offering large sums of money to their colleagues, in exchange for finding flaws and loopholes in the work of others, we must view the cause with suspicion. It is hardly a scientific approach.
Take this gentleman, for example:
His name is Kenneth Green.
He is presently listed as “a visiting scholar” at the American Enterprise Institute, an ExxonMobil-funded lobby group closely allied to the Bush administration.
According to the British Guardian newspaper, Kenneth Green has sent out letters to scientists and economists offering $10,000 to anyone undermining the latest IPCC report that was published last Friday.
Of course, as “a visiting scholar”, Kenneth Green may have no connection with the oil industry, or big business in general. A glimpse into his background says otherwise.
According to AEI’s own website, from 1994 – 2002, Green was Chief Scientist, Director of Environmental Program, at the Reason Foundation. That institution describes itself as “…….a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization completely supported by voluntary contributions from individuals, foundations, corporations, and the sale of our publications.”
A major “voluntary contributer” to the Reason Foundation was ExxonMobil. While at the Reason Foundation, Green was a signatory to this letter written in 2002 to George W Bush, in which representatives of right-wing organizations praise Bush’s decision not to ratify the Kyoto agreement and note his “……principled opposition to Kyoto has come at considerable political cost, and we admire your resolution in the face of continuing environmental alarmism.”
After calling the Clinton-Gore Administration’s “Climate Action Report 2002” a “…….compilation and summary of junk science produced by the Clinton-Gore Administration in order to support their Kyoto agenda.” the letter finishes with the following request:
“……..pursuing your global warming and energy policies effectively will not be possible as long as key members of your administration do not fully support your policies. We therefore also urge you to dismiss or re-assign all administration employees who are not pursuing your agenda, just as you have done in several similar instances.”
After his stint at Reason, or at least, the establishment of that name, Green moved to a position as Director of the Centre for Studies in Risk, Regulation, and Environment, at the Fraser Institute, another “charitable” institution, this time in Canada.
The Fraser Institute is yet another right-wing establishment conveniently and of course “voluntarily” funded by big business. The drug mammoth, Pfizer, has a stake, as do the big oil and gas companies. No doubt the name ExxonMobil is not too far away.
Bringing us up-to-date on Mister Kenneth Green, we find that he left the Fraser Institute in 2005 to become Executive Director of the Environmental Literacy Council. The Council is, according to their website, “……dedicated to helping citizens, especially young people, participate wisely in this arena. An independent, non-profit organization, the Council gives teachers the tools to help students develop environmental literacy: a fundamental understanding of the systems of the world, both living and non-living, along with the analytical skills needed to weigh scientific evidence and policy choices”.
Well, what could be nicer! But, an “independent, non-profit organization”? Where have we heard that before?
According to “Media Transparency”, the ELC gets the bulk of its funding from the Sarah Scaife Foundation – a bi-product of the Mellon industrial, oil and banking fortune (The Gulf Oil Company, to be precise) and the Earhart Foundation, started by Harry B. Earhart in 1929 with the fortune he made with White Star Oil Company. White Star was eventually bought out, and much later became part of – would you believe? – ExxonMobil. It’s all HERE, if you care to thrash through it.
Oh, and surprise! Surprise! – the Earhart Foundation is a major contributer to none other than – the American Enterprise Institute.
The wheel spins full circle.
Interestingly, when researching all these so-called “think-tanks”, apart from their links to the oil industry, one other common denominator surfaces. They are the domains of rich, Libertarian right-wingers who have no time for government and worship their version of the “free market”. Except, there is little “free” about their markets. Price gouging and price fixing are the order of the day. People like Kenneth Green may be relatively small pawns in this powerful political machine, but the aggregation of wealth and its attendant power are their sole ambitions.
Their aim is the disillusion of government, or distilling it to such a degree it becomes a puppet to their demands. George W Bush’s illogical stand against global warming; his refusal to frame legislation to curb greenhouse gas emissions, is evidence of their success.
Kenneth Green and his like want to rule the planet, and it seems they won’t allow anything to stand in their way.
