A Comment About Human Rights

 

I am still refusing to talk about politics.  This post is the closest I am coming to deviating from that.  I argue, however, that this post is about human rights, not politics.  I think that the fact that the USA bombed Iran yesterday does not necessarily imply that we must bomb Iran tomorrow.  There are some good things about the possibility for leadership change in Iran, however, I feel compelled to speak out about this.  I thought about my policy.  I also thought about a young female activist I knew a little bit in high school, whom I thought was politically very astute.  She opposed the Iraq War adamantly.  Unlike me, she was not into nationalism.  I wasn't close friends with her, but I remember her example.  I apologize if I am viewed as "late" in thinking that I should write this post, in spite of my firm pledge to avoid political discussion.  It is partly my responsibility, because I am an American citizen.  I must bend my rule, a little bit, to speak out about this, because I can imagine myself losing a debate to the activist I knew in HS if I didn't.  The reason why I might be "late" is just that I hadn't thought of the moral argument that I ought to be absolutely compelled to speak out, even if I have "a policy" that says I shouldn't.  I criticized Barack Obama for not changing "his policy" or whatever on not answering me; people have policies, and I have strict policies, but also, people have rights and feelings.  I remember Barack Obama really didn't like the Adam Lanza shooting.  I really do not like this news story being true, and I must speak out about it.  I might not have thought of this if not for a particular photo that I saw Benjamin Netanyahu pose for in the news...it reminded me of a teacher at that high school whom the activist had quarreled with a little bit.

Here is the link to the discussion of the human rights abuses by the USA government, which are unacceptable:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/how-iran-girls-school-bombing-unfolded-as-us-blamed-for-deadly-strike/ar-AA1XlYkg

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Math Update: My P != NP Proof Might Be Correct!!!!! -- (update, no it's not, see the note at the beginning and the updates near the bottom)

EDIT:  No, this proof is not correct.  See the updates at the bottom for details on why (based on Dr. Zelinsky's comment).  Fortunately, my GLL proof and MSR proofs still appear to be correct. It could be that Joshua Zelinsky's comment actually helps me to complete the proof. The GLL proof appears to be correct, AFAIK. The thing is, the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent --> P != NP" within PA and the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent" as a theorem of ZFC just shows that P != NP is a theorem of PA.  That isn't a contradiction, it's just another step in the proof. I think the striking idea is, P != NP is a theorem of PA, but not of ZFC.  That is what I worked to prove.  AFAIK it is possible for a proposition to be a theorem of PA but not of ZFC.  In particular, PA can be proved consistent from ZFC, so we would think it s possible and even likely that there are some non-theorems of ZFC that are theorems of PA. So this is great!  It l...
Read more

Hello, Texas - A Quick Monopoly Lesson

  So today, I thought I saw some people running around blurting code gestures at me.  One of the codes seemed to say, "Riot for a[buse] v[ictim] time -M".  Oh, M?  M as in Monolith, or M as in Monopoly fan who doesn't get it? Here, Houstonian code-talkers...let me teach you how to play Monopoly, since you are so hungry for free knowledge:  - Make deals with other players that benefit you.  - Offer deals to difficult players that are somewhat beneficial to them, knowing that they might reject.  - Watch which deals other players reject, and identify what *deal types* they are not likely to accept from you or anyone else.  - Be very very careful about your own deals--and behavior--lest you get figured out by your opponents and backed into a corner, with good, beneficial deals being made without you by cunning adversaries who know your every move. There's a poker lesson in there, too, but I don't want to get too educational right now.
Read more

Flash Non-Fiction: James Bond and Masculinity

  This was going to be a longer essay, but I decided to just blurt out my point rather than trying to write well. Basically, I think James Bond movies are good, and the songs are high-quality too, but it sends semi-dangerous messages to men in particular about what it means to be a man.  The Bond character is intransigent, aggressive, violent, and absolutely sure of himself in all cases.  He is portrayed as a big winner--able to date and have sex with beautiful women, almost impossible to kill, and lethal and elite at both armed and unarmed combat. I'm concerned that some men, including my estranged father ASW, have had their sense of morality warped by Bond movies.  They think that this dramatically presented way to be masculine is the only way.  I think that's unhealthy, and when people get the not-so-original idea to "try to be more Bond-like" in their personal lives, that leads to catastrophic conflicts with and major potential for deep pain for people that ...
Read more