<a href=”

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); = id; js.src = “//”; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));

” title=”8 year old Black kid shot for looking at someones face.”>8 year old Black kid shot for looking at someones face.

I hope Donald recovers well… And that the whole family gets psychological support. But it’s the United States, so chances are slim.

“Doesn’t want the kids to look at his face” sounds like some serious mental health problem that calls for a closed ward now.

I’m sure the Dallas Republican Party (or the Texan RP) has made sure to cut all kinds of social assistance programs; the ones that directly hurt (poor) people, people of colour, the sick, the mental patients, sexworkers and etc. and the ones that indirectly hurt other people by cutting funding for mental health services.

This isn’t only about privilege, this is about systemic violence towards those groups.

This will keep happening if the conservatives aren’t voted out (here in Canada too if you vote for Rob Ford).


HIV fingerprinting in forensics.

HIV fingerprinting in forensics is extremely problematic.

Why? It can *not* prove direct transmission beyond reasonable doubt.
The reason: indirect transmission can never be ruled out (for the reason see below).

So… if there is a “match” between suspect and victim with control samples all non-matching:
1. An unknown could have infected both.
2. The suspect could have infected an unknown who then infected the victim.
3. The victim could have infected an unknown who then infected the suspect.
4. The victim could have infected the suspect.
5. Unknown A could have infected the victim and unknown B. Unknown B then have infected the suspect.
6. Etc. etc.

Unlike fingerprinting and DNA fingerprinting no likelihood can be established of a full match. Even within one individual two samples will never have a full match. Calling it fingerprinting does philogenetic testing disservice and confuses the heck out of judges and jurors.

Iran wants to go nuclear. And not be so dependant on fossil fuels. Good idea?

Iran wants to have nuclear power plants for its energy supply.

Every country has that right under international law.

Yes, Iran will then be steps away from being able to make nuclear missiles.
However, by 2003 it had ended all research into weaponisation (US intelligence and the IAEA are satisfied) and its Islamic rulers consider use of nuclear weapons against Islam. Israel, the country that -together with Saudi Arabia- fears a nuclear Iran; Israel considers it highly unlikely Iran would use a nuclear bomb.

Some countries with nuclear power plants and nuclear bombs:

1) Israel -large nuclear arsenal, 2 power plants,
2) Canada -powerplants, no bombs but gives money to US nuclear programs,
3) The Netherlands -keeps nuclear missiles for US, one power plant.
4) The UK,
5) France,
6) Turkey -keeps them for US.

And countries that have nuclear missiles and are politically and militarily unstable:
7) India,
 Pakistan -military has links to Taliban and Islamist groups,
9) North Korea.

Dangerously unclear words by politicians given as reasons to go bomb Iran for: “Nuclear Arms Capability” or worse “Power to Go Nuclear.”

Could mean 3 things:
(from Joshua Pollack,

a. “Capable of making lots of highly enriched uranium”. Iran is already there since the early 2000s.
b. *Secretly* building bombs. Is secret. Not being able to use political power of acknowledging having nuclear power is downside.
c. “Renouncing treaty obligations, kicking out inspectors, building maybe half a dozen devices, and testing a couple of them”- That’s what North Korea did. Iran not doing this.

Reaching NAC is not illegal under international law, only the building of nuclear weapons is.

And have a good morning.



Extreme Right and religious parties in Europe: 1930’s and 2010’s

Including a swing to the right of Catholic/Russian/Greek orthodox parties in the east and south of Europe.

In the Netherlands weakening of women’s health rights and LGBTQ rights came from the Christian Democrats and the tiny Protestant Orthodox parties.

In a strange twist conservative Muslim and Jewish voters have joined the Christian Democratic Party (CDA) which also houses the Catholic south of the Netherlands.

Islamophobia, homophobia and misogyny mixed together: the enemy of your enemy is your friend (and your enemy).


Surviving cancer.

Finding another malignant mass. Painful to read and striking. You can feel the strength of the writer and their fear, the feeling lost, the feeling *of* loss.

And the frights you get from your MRI appointments being cancelled, scheduled, rescheduled. Filling in the same forms three or four times with different people.

This piece on surviving cancer is from Aviva Rubin, writer and mother of two boys. She blogs on parenting in the Huff-Po and various newspapers and magazines.


Offensive and racist phrases to avoid or not.

How do you take this information “into” your speech?

Some are easy enough: don’t use “Jew down” or “Nitty-Gritty” or “Eskimo” or “That’s so gay!”

But what about the Dutch “Hiep Hiep Hoera” shouted at birthdays? The Dutch took it from the Germans when they were fighting together I don’t know who in 1815, and not having a clue what it meant.

It comes from “Hep Hep” which originated in 100 CE’s anti-semitism and islamophobia…

Does the meaning of a word change when its original sentiment is forgotten, only alive in the memories of linguists and historians?

I guess it’s a semantic and interpersonal question.

And Paddy wagon too offensive to use? I think that term is not at all offensive any more. The Irish have been firmly ‘rooted’ in all socio-economic strata for far too long to compare that slur to offensive terms used “for” groups that still suffer from racism, classism, poverty etc. The demeaning and discriminatory power of that word has gone. As has the power of the”rule of thumb.”