Trivial Pursuit

Which of the states produces more rice than any of the others?

RICE CULTURE

By Henry C. Dethloff

The Texas rice industry owes its origins to the introduction of rice (Oryza sativa) seed from Madagascar to the Carolina colonies about 1685. Production, milling, and marketing flourished in South Carolina and Georgia for the next 200 years. Although there was early domestic cultivation of rice in Louisiana and Texas, commercial rice production began in Louisiana shortly before the Civil War and in the 1880s spread rapidly through the coastal prairies of southwest Louisiana into southeast Texas. Arkansas, California, Louisiana, and Texas now produce 90 percent of the American rice crop, with lesser production along the Mississippi River in Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee. The earliest form of rice cultivation in Texas involved essentially pioneering agriculture. Farmers plowed small plots with oxen, planted seed by hand, depended on rainfall for cultivation, and harvested with hand sickles. Milling was with a crude mortar and pestle. Consumption was strictly

local. Considerable acreages of rice were grown in southeast Texas as early as 1853 by William Goyens and in Beaumont in 1863 by David French. The latter is often considered the first major rice farmer in Texas. Modern commercial production in Texas derived largely from the completion of the southern transcontinental railroad in 1883 and its acquisition by the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1885, coupled with the availability of cheap land on the coastal prairies, the introduction of modern rice mills, and an influx of immigrants from Louisiana and from the grain producing areas of the Midwest. The latter brought with them combines and mechanized agriculture. Pumps, canals, modern irrigation systems, and improved varieties contributed to expanded production. Edgar Carruthers, Louis Bordages, and Dan Wingate produced the state's first large commercial crop of rice on a 200-acre farm near Beaumont in 1886. They shipped their crop by rail to New Orleans for milling. In 1891 Joseph E. Broussard established the first rice irrigation and canal system in the state, and the following year he added rice milling machinery to an existing gristmill, thus initiating rice milling in Texas and paving the way for the rapid expansion of production. Texas farmers planted 234,000 acres of rice in 1903 compared to Louisiana's 376,000 acres. The two states then produced 99 percent of the total rice crop, with production having virtually ceased in South Carolina and Georgia.

An important event in the development of the Texas Gulf Coast rice industry was the introduction of seed imported from Japan in 1904. Seed rice had previously come from Honduras or the Carolinas. At the invitation of the Houston Chamber of Commerce and the Southern Pacific Railroad, Japanese farmers were brought to Texas to advise local farmers on rice production, bringing with them seed as a gift from the emperor of Japan. The first three years' harvest, which produced an average of thirty-four barrels an acre compared with an average of eighteen to twenty barrels from native rice seed, was sold as seed to Louisiana and Texas farmers. C. J. Knapp, founder of the United States agricultural agent system, helped to overcome government regulation to bring seed rice into the country. Japanese rice production began at Webster in Harris County under the direction of Seito Saibara, his family, and thirty original colonists. The Saibara family has been credited with establishing the Gulf Coast rice industry.

Arkansas became a major rice producer after 1900, eventually surpassing Texas and Louisiana production. In 1915 Louisiana and Arkansas produced 12 million hundredweight of rice on 740,000 acres of land, and production was beginning to develop in California. In Texas rice mills operated in Port Arthur, Beaumont, Orange, and Houston. Texas-milled rice went to world markets by rail and through the ports of Houston and Galveston. The Beaumont Cooperative Rice Experiment Station began operation in 1912, under the cooperative management of Texas A&M University and the United States Department of Agriculture. Rice prices, like the price of other agricultural commodities, collapsed after World War I, bringing hard times to rice farmers. This was followed by the even more difficult years of the Great Depression. Various agricultural credit acts and finally the Agricultural Adjustment Act of the New Deal established the precedent for price, production, and marketing controls that generally characterize the industry to the present. Rice farming in the United States has historically been a large-scale, capital-intensive enterprise, heavily dependent upon international markets. The United States markets annually 15–30 percent of the total world rice exports, although it accounts for only 2 percent of world production. Texas growers annually produce 20 million hundredweight of rice on 350,000 acres of land. In various years between 1974 and 1990 Texas rice farms averaged from 250 to 450 acres in size. The number of rice farms remained generally stable with 1,200 to 1,500 units in production. The value of the crop in the field in 1990 was $200 million. Rising domestic consumption and the opening of new international markets are expected to sustain the United States and Texas rice industry.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Henry C. Dethloff, A History of the American Rice Industry, 1685–1985 (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1988). John Norman Efferson, The Production and Marketing of Rice (New Orleans: Simmons Press, 1952). Houston Metropolitan Research Center Files, Houston Public Library. Edward Hake Phillips, "The Gulf Coast Rice Industry," Journal of Agricultural History 25 (April 1954). Randell K. Smith, Eric J. Wailes, and Gail L. Cramer, The Market Structure of the U.S. Rice Industry (Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, February 1990). Vertical Files, Dolph Briscoe Center for American History, University of Texas at Austin.

KISHI COLONY, TX

By Robert Wooster

The Kishi Colony was one of at least three small Japanese settlements established on the Texas coastal plains during the early twentieth century. The community, about ten miles east of Beaumont in central Orange County, was founded by Kichimatsu Kishi, a veteran of the Russo-Japanese War and a graduate of the University of Tokyo. Anxious to get land of his own, Kishi moved to the United States in 1906 and visited California, the Carolinas, and Mississippi before deciding upon the Orange County site. Borrowing heavily, he secured a tract in 1907. The following year he and several fellow Japanese immigrants planted their first rice crops. Several, including Kishi, brought their families to the United States, and the Japanese colony at Kishi eventually included thirty-two men, five women, and four children.

The new settlers faced severe problems in their daring enterprise. The dredging of the Sabine River allowed saltwater to infiltrate Cow Bayou and thereby ruin their irrigated rice crops. The general collapse of the rice market in 1920 led the colonists to turn to truck farming in an attempt to pay off their loans. With the new emphasis also came a number of Hispanic and Cajun laborers. Kishi also sought to diversify through cattle raising and oil exploration. Despite such efforts, the Great Depression led to the Kishi Colony's final collapse, when the settlers were unable to pay off their mortgages.

While refusing to forget their traditional ways, the Kishi colonists adapted to their new culture well. They built a school and church, and several of their descendants fought for their new country during World War II. A few of the former immigrants remained in Southeast Texas, and many of their descendants still live in the area.

The colony's founder, Kichimatsu Kishi, died in 1956. A Texas Historical Commission marker was dedicated on Farm Road 1135 seven miles southeast of Vidor on October 3, 1982, in honor of the efforts of Kishi and his fellow immigrants.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gwendolyn Rosser Wingate, "The Kishi Colony," Las Sabinas: The Official Quarterly Publication of the Orange County Historical Society 9 (January 1983).

On this day in 1982, a marker was erected at the site of the Kishi Colony to honor Japanese pioneer Kichimatsu Kishi and the settlement he founded. The colony was one of at least three small Japanese settlements established on the Texas coastal plain during the early twentieth century. The community, about ten miles east of Beaumont in central Orange County, was founded by Kishi, a veteran of the Russo-Japanese War. He purchased the land in 1907, and in the following year he and other Japanese immigrants planted their first rice crops. Several, including Kishi, brought their families to the United States. The Japanese colony at Kishi eventually included thirty-two men, five women, and four children. Although the Great Depression led to the Kishi Colony's collapse, a few of the former immigrants remained in Southeast Texas. Many of their descendants still live in the area.

~~~

December 7, 1941

On a lazy Sunday morning 72 years ago, American Army and Navy bases at Pearl Harbor were attacked by warplanes of the Imperial Japanese Navy. More than 2,000 Americans were killed and more than 1,000 were injured.

At dawn that Sunday, forces of the Empire of Japan attacked the U. S. Pacific Fleet and other military targets. Their goal was to cripple the fleet, allowing Japan to attack and capture the Philippines and Indo-China. This would grant Japan access to badly needed raw materials that would enhance the Empire’s plans to conquer and occupy Australia, New Zealand, and India. The Japanese believed that this would allow them to gain military and political control of East, Southeast, and South Asia as well as the entirety of the Pacific Ocean. The only thing standing in their way was the U.S. Pacific Fleet.

Japanese Admiral Yamamoto conceived and planned the attack, although he did not intend war with the United States. Yamamoto had first hand knowledge of American industrial strength and our material wealth. He also recognized America’s temperament and was unwilling to test it. Yamamoto  was a practical man, but his superiors were less so and were quite arrogant. Yamamoto was overruled, and being the good soldier and loyal subject, he applied his efforts as Commander in Chief of the Imperial Combined Fleet to a successful attack.

Yamamoto knew that the decision was a terrible mistake, and following the attack was quoted as saying "…we have awakened a sleeping giant and have instilled in him a terrible resolve…"

Yamamoto was right. The Admiral perhaps knew that by this one act Japan had doomed their plans to failure. Ironically Japan could have gained the coveted geography without attacking the U.S. Fleet. Pearl Harbor became the worst strategic mistake they could have made.

Prior to the attack the U. S. had written the Philippines off, assuming a strictly defensive posture against Japan. The attack resulted in immediate reaction and unprecedented unity from the American people and among the fractured political factions. Americans of every class sent sons and daughters to war as mothers entered the industrial work force. Every resource possessed by the U.S. was brought to bear. Until Pearl Harbor our war efforts were focused on Europe. Following the attack we turned our efforts to the complete defeat of Japan at any cost.

As Yamamoto feared, our industrial strength and the will of our people was the foundation for victory. Japan simply could not replace lost resources in the way we could. In many of the Pacific battles our military did not fair so well, but even with tactical losses we very often still gained strategic victory.

As we closed in on the Japanese homeland, the Samurai culture within the Japanese military displayed their desperation, and resulted in the Kamikaze attacks on our Navy. Japanese culture dictated that dying for the Emperor was a high honor and scoffed at the disgrace of surrender. Our military leaders recognized that taking the mainland would come at high cost. If Okinawa taught us anything it was this. Invasion of the Japanese homeland appeared out of the question. 

Back home our laboratories were busy developing the nuclear weapons that would bring a quick termination of the War in the Pacific, but at a terrible cost in human life and suffering.

Conservative estimates tell us that 225,000 died in the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and that as many more suffered lifelong effect. It was a decision where there could be no correct outcome.

Many Americans lived that surly would have been killed in any conventional assault, but one of the lingering questions remaining from that war has yet to be answered. Might there have been a way to have won this war yet avoid the unleashing of the nuclear dogs? We will never know. Philosophers and pundits will forever debate, and the answer will forever remain in the realm of speculation.

###

10 days warning

William Matson was fond of the name “Lurline” from the time in the 1870s when he served as skipper of Claus Spreckel’s yacht of the same name. It was while skippering that yacht that Matson met his wife Lillie who later gave him a daughter. The young girl was named Lurline.

A few years later Matson went into business for himself with a schooner named the Emma Claudina. Matson used the schooner to ferry supplies and a few passengers to Hawaii and returning with cargos of Spreckel’s sugar. Spreckel later sold Matson a 150-foot brigantine, doubling his shipping operation. The brigantine was renamed the Lurline.

Matson added other vessels to his fleet and sold the brigantine to another company in 1896. In 1908 Matson built the steamship he named Lurline. This steamer carried mainly freight but could hold 51 passengers along with 65 crew. The ship sailed in the Matson line for twenty years.

Matson commissioned William Francis Gibbs to design and build four smart liners for the Matson’s Pacific services. In 1932 the last of these was launched and was promptly named the SS Lurline. She was christened on July 12, 1932 in Quincy, Massachusetts.

It was on this day in 1941 as President Roosevelt was attending a delayed Thanksgiving dinner with patients of the Polio Institute that the Lurline was steaming on its regular route from San Francisco to Honolulu. Roosevelt was notified that a radio signal was received from the Lurline alerting of the sighting a Japanese war fleet. Radio signals identified as Japanese were monitored over the next four days until the Lurline docked at Honolulu Harbor.

Lurline departed on schedule and was halfway from Honolulu to San Francisco on December 7, 1941 when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. The Lurline made her destination safely, travelling at maximum speed, and soon returned to Hawaii as part of a convoy carrying troops and supplies. Lurline spent the rest of the war serving the U.S. Navy in the Pacific providing similar services, often voyaging to Australia, and once transported Australian Prime Minister John Curtin to America to confer with President Roosevelt.

After the war the Lurline returned to the profitable first-class only routes she sailed before, continuing this service into the early 60s. In 1962 she arrived in Los Angeles with serious engine trouble. The repairs considered too expensive and was sold 1963. Repaired and rechristened in 1963 by Chandris Lines as the MS Ellinis, the former SS Lurline became one of the most important luxury cruise ships on the Australian and New Zealand services. She operated in Australasia and Oceania until 1980.

In October 1981, after providing passenger services for nearly fifty years she was finally laid up in a Greek shipyard. Various plans were hatched to utilize the ship whole, but finally she was scrapped in Taiwan in 1987. The heart of the Lurline lives on as some of her fittings were installed in other ships and her engine parts were stored against future need by her aging sister ship; the former Monterey.

###

The amazing adventures of the USS Barb

One of the more adventurous stories to come out of the War in the Pacific was that of the submarine USS Barb and her skipper, Eugene "Lucky" Fluckey. In one of the stranger incidents in the war, Fluckey sent a landing party ashore to set demolition charges on a coastal railway line, which destroyed a 16-car train. This is reputed to be the only landing by U.S. military forces on the Japanese home islands during World War II.

Fluckey wanted to blow the rail line, but he wanted to blow a train too and that presented a real problem. The rail line itself would no problem. A shore party could plant one of the sub's 55-pound scuttling charges and make short work of that.

Fluckey refused to risk the lives of his men, so he and his officers spent long hours trying to figure out how to detonate the explosives at the moment the train passed, without endangering the shore party. So Fluckey and his officers spent some time puzzling over how they could take out the rails along with one of the frequent trains shuttling troops and supplies to equip the Japanese war machine.

Electrician Mate Billy Hatfield, USNR, offered an idea: Instead a crewman on shore to trigger explosives, rig the charge so that the passing train would trigger it and blow itself up. Hatfield explained how he had cracked walnuts on the railroad tracks as a kid by placing the nuts between two ties so the sagging of the rail under the weight of a train would break them open.

So instead of nuts, Hatfield suggested, a micro switch could be hooked to the charge and mounted between two ties under the steel rail. The plan sounded good and was adopted by the officers. Volunteers were easy to find. Everyone on the boat wanted to go, including the Skipper. One of Flukey’s officers put an end to that idea by threatening to send a message to ComSubPac.

So it was that on the night of July 22, 1945, in Patience Bay off the coast of Karafuto, Japan, the Barb silently moved to within 950 yards of shore and dispatched a shore party of eight sailors. The charge was placed as planned and the party returned to the two boats that had carried them to shore. They were only halfway back when the sub's machine gunner spotted a train rolling up the tracks. Fluckey abandoned caution, grabbing a megaphone and yelling for the party to "Paddle like the devil!"

At 0146 hrs on the morning of the 23rd, with the shore party still a couple hundred yards from the Barb, the night lit up as the locomotive boilers split open and ammunition in boxcars started streaking into the sky. It was a full five minutes later before the shore party could be lifted to the deck. The Barb departed at the highest speed possible in shallow water and long moments before the sub reached water deep enough to find safety below the waves.

The USS Barb (SS-220) was a Gato-class submarine and contrary to common thought she was not named for a woman. She was the first U.S. Navy ship to be named for the barbus; a fish. She compiled one of the more outstanding submarine records of World War II. During the seven war patrols she conducted in the Pacific between March 1944-August 1945, she is officially credited with sinking 17 enemy vessels totaling 96,628 tons, including the Japanese aircraft carrier Unyo. Barb received the Presidential Unit Citation, Navy Unit Commendation, and eight battle stars for her World War II service.

The little adventure with the train garnered Fluckey one of the four Navy Crosses he earned in a long and adventurous career. He earned the Medal of Honor for an earlier mission, also aboard the Barb. Regrettably the Barb suffered a more inglorious fate. In 1953 the submarine once crewed by the likes of “Lucky” Fluckey was loaned to the Italian Navy and renamed the Enrico Tazzoli. Less than 20 years later the once proud lady was sold for scrap.

On June 28 at Anne Arundel Medical Center, Medal of Honor and Four Time Navy Cross Recipient

Rear Admiral Eugene Fluckey died. He was 93 and had Alzheimer's disease, and he led one hell of a life. 

Fair winds, Lucky... and for the Barb as well.

###

Religious wingnut supports rewriting history

This is what is running for the Texas State Board of Education.

 

The social studies curriculum this loon supports with her own alternate version of history was roundly criticized even by the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute. The religious wingnuts are staging a hostile takeover of Texas public schools with the intent of indoctrinating the children with their false history and religious myths.

In a state where (1) a large percentage of rural, voting age citizens shun education in favor of just accepting what they are told, and (2) 51% identify themselves as "very conservative", and (3) straight party ticket voting is allowed, reason and intellectualism may well be driven somewhere north of the Red River.

I miss Ann Richards and Moly Ivins.

H/T

###

Tea Bag Obfuscation

"The late comedian George Carlin used to say America was built on a double standard: 'This country was founded by slave owners who wanted to be free.”

So observes Wall Street Journal writer Sam Favate in his piece Tennessee Tea Party Wants Schools to Be Nicer to Founding Fathers.

“Neglect and outright ill will have distorted the teaching of the history and character of the United States. We seek to compel the teaching of students in Tennessee the truth regarding the history of our nation and the nature of its government.”

So say the right wing activists pushing this change in textbook standards. Opponents to this silly revision correctly observe that this is simply an effort to veil the truth. In other words... another wingnut effort to indoctrinate the children with revisionist history.

###

Why America is no longer exceptional

This is one of the more damning reports I believe I’ve ever read.

“81 percent of seniors from our top fifty-five colleges and universities failed a test of basic U.S. history questions drawn from a national exam designed for high school seniors.  Only 22 percent knew, for example, that the words “government of the people, by the people, for the people” came from Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.  If most American youngsters don’t learn about their nation’s history in the K-12 years, they are unlikely ever to learn about it.”

From a History News Network article. Read the whole story HERE.

The sad part about this is we don’t seem to ever learn that putting dogmatists in charge of educational content contributes to the decline of understanding and knowledge. Judging from recent ballot victories, this might be just what the majority of Americans want.

The discussion in this report is about history, but social studies and science are also under dogmatist attack. Witness a recent opinion piece in Forbes, another in the Palm Beach Post, and some of the work coming from the Texas SBOE.

I'm sorry. The people who vote Republican want conservative, but that is not what they are getting. The Republican party long ago married itself to the "social" conservatives, and those now make up the vast majority of the biggoted dogmatists who have floated to the top of the right wingnut cesspool.

I'm all in favor of fiscal conservatism, but that goal will remain unachievable so long as these science deniers and historical revisionists remain in power. Their brand of "conservatism" more resembles the dream of the Taliban than that of the Founders of our nation. 

###

There's no one left to ask

What was it like?

 What was it like in the trenches? What was it like in all those places whose names have faded in the dusty recesses of memory, places like Ypres and Gallipoli, Verdun and the Marne? What was it like to fight the war that was supposed to make the world safe for democracy?

There's no one left to ask.

###

The modern origin of religious skepticism

Egypt has been in the news a good bit lately. While the country has been under the thumb of one oligarch or another for most of written history, Egypt has managed to mature into a modern, advanced society. It seems therefore rather appropriate to discuss some of the region’s history, and perhaps a bit of the intellectual origins of the Land of the Pharaohs.

Egypt is a land replete with larger than life characters and astounding human progress. There have been ups and downs, yet some of this planet’s greatest civilizations were nurtured by the fertile lands of the Nile valley.

The seeds of modern culture originated not in Egypt herself, but across the Mediterranean in a land in the north of Greece called Macedon. Alexander the Great, Macedonian King and would be world conqueror, planted those early seeds. Following the rape of Gaza in 332 BCE, Alexander was welcomed into Egypt as a savior, even assigned god-like status. Alexander must have liked this because he began referring to himself as the son of Zeus.

Alexander built a great city along the Mediterranean coast, naming it after himself. Historian Michael Wood said of Alexandria, "it was the first city of the civilized world in size, elegance, riches, and luxuries: where one could obtain anything imaginable to fill the needs of the body and soul. As its famous Pharos lighthouse was a welcome sight for weary travelers, Alexandria itself seemed to have acted as a beacon for merchants, curious tourists, religious prophets, and most importantly: the finest intellectual minds of the times.”

Around the same time Alexander ascended to the Macedonian throne following the death of his father King Phillip II, a happy Sicillian philosopher was born of privileged parents in Messina. We know he was a happy fellow because his name, Euhemerus, is taken from the Greek word euhēmeros, meaning ‘happy or prosperous.’ It is unclear if Euhemerus ever met Alexander, but we know that he did find some association with the Alexandrian Court.

In 331 BCE, Alexander departed Alexandria on a quest to conquer Babylonia and the Persian Empire. He never returned, and died in 323 BCE.

Cassander next ascended the Macedonian throne. The young King seemed to take a bit of a shine to Euhemerus, giving him a job in his court. According to Euhemerus writings, Cassander sent him on long, adventurous journeys, of which he kept detailed diaries. There are those who describe these journals as fictitious and I’m quite inclined to agree. Most of the writings are lost. What we know of them is from the surviving works of his contemporaries.

It one of the most important works, of which only scraps survive, Euhemerus describes a voyage by ship to an island somewhere in the Indian Ocean.  The island is called Panchaea, and Euhemerus describes the culture he encountered there in great detail. He found on the island a golden monument upon which were inscribed the feats of Greek gods. The monument was called Hiera anagraphē, or ‘Sacred Scripture’.

The stories spoke of the great Kings, Uranus, Cronus, and Zeus. These were human Kings later worshipped as gods. The island and the society of which he writes are imaginary, but the Kings described bore resemblance to real Hellenistic rulers of the day. This tale was commentary on the practice of these rulers pretending to serve the people, yet being desirous, in Alexanderesque fashion, of worship and elevation to the status of god.

Thus Euhemerus became mythographer in chief in the court of King Cassander. His tenure in the King’s court was brief, yet his skeptical philosophy would spread across western culture. The theory of god as man didn’t make much of an impression on his fellow Greeks, but the euhemerizing of man-gods had quite the effect on much of the rest of the civilized world.

The written works of Euhemerus have survived only in scraps and in the recollections of contemporaries such as Diodorus and Theodorus. The religious skepticism of a man 300 years dead at the time the Christian Messiah was born has had enduring effect. 600 years after the death of Euhemerus, the early Christian apologist Lactantius utilized euhemeristic thought to debunk the Greek gods in his work Divinae Institutiones. Interesting that he never made a similar leap with his on religious heroes.

Euhemeric thought treats religious myth as a reflection of an actual historical event… just made larger than life by societal change, frequent retelling and reinterpretation. In the Cyrenaic philosophical tradition embodied in the skepticism of Theodorus, euhemerism opened broad, new avenues for interpretation of ancient myth and contemporary religious belief.

Over those brief four years Euhemerus was fortunate enough to have access to the resources of the Cassandrian court, he benefitted greatly from the intellectual environment present in Alexander's great city by the sea. With exposure to Egyptian culture, the scholars, philosophers and tourists who often visited Alexandria, and the availability of Demetrius' great library, the knowledge of the developed world lay at his feet.

Euhemerus may have been the first true skeptic. Truly it is a shame so much of the original work has been lost. Still, with only those few salvaged fragments of his writings, Euhemerus managed to pave the skeptical path for many generations of philosophers.

###

The politics of fear and loathing

Religionistas: Islamophobia and Christophobia

On August 24, 2010, the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released the results of a recent opinion survey. 35% of Americans believe Islam encourages violence to a greater degree than other religions. Eight years ago, only months after the attacks of September 11, 2001 that figure stood at 25%.

45% offer the opposing opinion, saying that Islam does not encourage more violence than other religions, while 24% have no opinion.  The survey also revealed that 38% of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of Islam, compared to just 30% with a favorable view and 32% with no opinion. Recent events, small and large, have put this fear and the reaction to it on front-page display.

A taxi driver in Manhattan was savagely attacked merely because the assailant believed him to be Muslim. A proposed expansion of an Islamic center located a couple blocks away from the World Trade Center site causes volcanic levels of hysteria in the right-wing media and blogosphere. A nut-job minister in Gainesville, FL and about 50 of his followers grabs center stage by threatening to burn copies of the Quran. In Tennessee, federal investigators believe arsonists torched construction equipment at the site of a future mosque in Murfreesboro. In New York State, a Muslim community in Waterport has been targeted and harassed by teenagers.

Politicians, pundits and preachers are fanning the flames of Islamophobia, repeatedly insisting that all of Islam be responsible for the actions of a handful of extremists. Inversely, across the pond, Christians are feeling the brunt of similar fear and loathing, stoked mostly by radical Islamic clerics, religious extremists and leftist politicians.

In Muslim countries practicing Sharia law, discrimination against Christians and Jews is not just practiced, it is codified into law.  Egypt is one of the more secular and moderate of the Muslim countries with a sizable religious minority of Coptic Christians, yet Egyptian law stipulates that a "Muslim man may marry a Christian woman but the opposite is forbidden; and if a Muslim woman does marry a Christian man, both the husband and the wife would be considered adulterers". 

However, it is not only the Muslim countries where we find anti-Christian sentiment. Christophobia is rampant across Northern Europe and England, and in Israel the sentiment is strong.

In May of 2007 a Baptist church in Brighton, England, was invaded by anti-Christian squatters who promptly wrecked the place with garbage and graffiti. In May of 2008, the mayor of a small city near Tel Aviv ordered hundreds of New Testaments confiscated from his citizens. These were later burned. Since the early 90’s, nine Christian churches have been burned in Norway.

In 2009 a Vienna, Austria based security organization issued a report confirming that Christophobia has become not only wide-spread, but perfectly acceptable in Asia, Africa and Europe, much as Islamophobia has become perfectly acceptable in America, Germany, the Netherlands and Great Brittan.  

The struggle isn’t new. Along with Judaism, these philosophies have been doing battle on one front or another for thousands of years, locked in an ongoing struggle for control of the Western World. The holy books of each of these commands adherents to engage the infidels, and to establish nations under Islamic law/Biblical law/The Law of Moses… whatever.

It is all nonsense.

Some 235 years ago a group of wise men recognized the futility of these millennial struggles and, seeking to create a more perfect union, devised a political system outside of any religious law. The framers of our Constitution and the Founders of our republic crafted a constitution that specifically excluded religion of any stripe. The only language in our Constitution that even mentions religion is exclusionary.

Article VI Paragraph 3 of our Constitution states that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” Then there are the two First Amendment clauses commonly known as the "religion clauses" are the Establishment Clause, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," and the Free Exercise Clause "prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Now, after all these years, we find Christian extremists twisting the words of our Founders in an attempt to circumvent the Establishment Clause, promoting the myth that America was created as a Christian nation, while viral political rhetoric has created a de facto religious test for public office. In the process they are attempting to backdoor Biblical law and, with the help of FOX News and the right wingnut blogosphere, establish the accepted discrimination of Muslims and others who are not “like us.”

The 6,000 year-old struggle progresses unabated while fear and loathing stokes the flames of hatred and violence. One of these days we may discover, perhaps too late, that religion in any form is corrosive to peace and individual freedom.

Thomas Jefferson was a visionary.

~~

The Maya

The reason I've been quiet for the past few days is that I've not been here. Needing a break from work, I took a brief trip to Belize with a two-fold intent. Snorkeling the world's longest coral reef... and exploring Mayan history.

Today, as I prepare to return to the States, I'll post a few photos from Lamanai, the northern Belizian site that is home to the tallest Mayan temple yet unearthed. Lamanai is the one of the largest pre-classic sites in the Mayan world, with over 700 structures identified and several unearthed and restored.

Steps leading up to the Mask temple.

The reason it is called the Mask temple. There is one of these 10-foot tall mask carvings on either side of the steps.

The archaeologists think this might have been some kind of arena. Mayans would meet each other in various sporting challenges. The winner of the game was awarded the privilege of becoming the next sacrifice.

The Jaguar temple. So named because the image of a jaguar can be made out if one views the temple from a certain angle.

This is the Lag, or the High temple. From ground level this structure rises over 100 feet. Climbing is difficult due to the really poorly spaced steps (too tall and far too steep), but climbing is allowed. The assist rope is visible running up the steps in this photo.

Looking down from the top it is easy to see just how steep is the climb.

The view from the top of the High temple is spectacular, allowing an unobstructed 360 degree panorama. This view shows the lake around which the city grew.

The climb up was tedious and very tiring, but here is proof that even an old fart can achieve a dream. Descending is every bit as difficult.

Now, I need to pack the Macbook and prepare for boarding. I'll post a few other photos later.

~~

Revisionism refuted

On Wednesday, March 24th, The Texas Freedom Network posted a fine essay on their online publication, the TFN Insider, completely refuting the Texas State Board of Education’s ill advised efforts to repeal recorded history in favor of their Christian revisionism.

In case you’ve missed it, the TxSBOE has recently issued social studies curriculum standards in which they amputated Thomas Jefferson in favor of Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and Sir. William Blackstone, on the grounds that the Jeffersonian argument for separation of church and state was “misplaced” in the standard.

The original standard read:

“explain the impact of Enlightenment ideas from John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Voltaire, Charles de Montesquieu, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Thomas Jefferson on political revolutions from 1750 to the present.”

That was before Christian conservative boardmember Cynthia Dunbar, of the Houston area, convinced the board to alter the standard just a bit.

“explain the impact of the writings of John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Voltaire, Charles de Montesquieu, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and Sir William Blackstone.”

The TxSBOE has sought no guidance from real historians, insisting instead that their own opinions are factual. TxSBOE Chairperson Gail Lowe, another Christian conservative from the Texas Hill Country town of Lampasas, said this about the earlier standard and the reason for the change: “This was inappropriate placement of Jefferson’s name. Jefferson was not himself an Enlightenment philosopher, although he was heavily influenced by the writings of these individuals.”

Jefferson not an enlightenment philosopher… hmmm…

So, since the Board was wont to seek the professional help they so desperately need, the TFN did it for them, posing the question of Jefferson’s enlightened status to an expert in colonial American history, SMU professor Dr. Edward Countryman. Dr. Countryman, who doesn’t have a dog in the hunt other than to care about truth in educational standards, completely strips the hide off of the revisionist’s argument.

Whether this intervention will manage to sway the Board or not is unknown, but perhaps the TFN’s efforts will help enlighten some of the more astute Texans on the efforts of a small, inbred tribe of cultists, and the damage revisionism will inevitably cause to our school kids. It does not matter if you are godded or godless, you should recognize the necessity of accuracy in curriculum standards.

Please read Dr. Countryman’s full reply, then please link to the TFN.

Help spread the word.

~~

1,102

That is the number of Women Airforce Service Pilots, or WASPS, who served in World War II. Fewer than 300 of those women remain alive today. Their service to this country in wartime, although long honored by the public, has never been officially recognized… until now.

It is an oversight that lasted far longer than it should have, but today, in probably the first really bipartisan effort we’ve seen in decades, our lawmakers awarded the Congressional Gold Medal to the women who served. In speech after speech, congress members lauded the contributions of these women who did dangerous work as part of the war effort, testing and ferrying warplanes and flying targets for artillery gunners. The award ceremony was accompanied by a memorial service and wreath-laying ceremony in memory of the 38 who died in that effort.

The WASPs' served unselfishly and without the accolades or honors their male counterparts regularly received. The records of WASP service and accomplishments were sealed for decades and they weren't even recognized as veterans until 1977. Only about 300 are still alive today.

Their service did not go completely unnoticed, and their ability to fly every type of aircraft obviously impressed U.S. Air Force Gen. Henry Harley “Hap” Arnold, who once observed, “We have not been able to build an airplane that you can’t handle. It is on the record that women can fly as well as men.”

Retired U.S. Coast Guard Vice Adm. Vivien Crea, the keynote speaker, spoke glowingly of the women who answered the call to duty and launched an unheard of branch of the air service, and would go on to inspire future generations. 



“As aviators, you possessed an invaluable capability that our nation desperately wanted,” Crea said. “You joined not because you were great pioneers, but because of your great sense of duty. You served America in its time of peril.” 



Crea, inspired by the WASPs’ service, became an accomplished pilot in her own right. She served for 36 years, became the 25th vice commandant of the Coast Guard, and the 21st and only female Ancient Albatross, a designation given to the longest serving active duty Coast Guard aviator.

This national recognition came too late for many of those who served, but about 200 of those first WASPs attended the ceremony, many of them clad in their World War II-era service uniform. The attending survivors placed roses next to a wreath as a tribute to those who have died during and since the war.

At the close of the ceremony, the 20th Fighter Wing from Shaw Air Force Base, S.C., performed a flyover in the “missing man” formation.

It was a fitting tribute to some of the true heroes of World War II.

~~

Revisionism

Columnist Bob Ray Sanders is simultaneously a much loved, award winning writer for the Fort Worth Star Telegram, and a reviled pinko-socialist mouthpiece for the no-longer locally owned liberal rag. Take your pick.

Myself? I mostly like Bob Ray. He gets a bit out on the limb at times in his commentary on racial issues, but certainly he is no Al Sharpton. When Bob Ray goes down that tired, old trail... I turn the page and move on. On many other social issues, Bob Ray is a frequent home run hitter.

His piece this morning is titled, When religious zeal displaces the truth in history books, and the topic is one to which I pay rather close attention; Revisionist history, or the attempts of true believers to change the history and science books to suit a political or philosophical end. Unfortunately, the efforts to do just that come far too frequently and are frequently all too successful. The result is someone like Bob Ray illustrates in his column.

Bob Ray relates the details of his morning commute, including the spinning of the radio dial to find something of interest. The morning of which he writes, Bob Ray tuned to a popular right-wing call-in talk show, aired daily on Fort Worth’s legendary WBAP radio. The show host, Mark Davis, is a regional favorite and although I seldom agree with his too-far right views, I still tune in and listen from time to time.

I wasn’t listening the morning Bob Ray describes, but I wish I was. Davis, it seems, spoke regarding Buddhism, commenting that the Buddhist belief was older than Christianity.

One of Davis’ listeners apparently took exception, insisting Davis was wrong… that there was no religion older than Christianity. Davis apparently attempted to reason with the caller, explaining that Buddhism has roots predating the birth of Jesus by maybe 600 years. Nothing worked on the caller, who insisted that the God of creation was the Christian god, and that no religion predated creation.

Bob Ray makes it clear that he too is Christian, but then goes on to wonder from whence comes the disrespect of other people’s beliefs?

"I often wonder what makes religious people, especially Christians, so arrogant and, frankly, so bigoted.”

Yeah, I’ve wondered that too, Bob Ray. Christians, throughout history, have sought to steamroll anyone or any group whom they could not “save.” The result has been untold suffering, and even the retardation of medicine and science. For a religion that is supposed to be good and loving, they sure are capable of a bunch of evil and hatred.

"Besides, as I've said many times before, most of the world's great religions teach that you serve God by serving humanity. Certainly many of the principles of Buddhism -- seeking wisdom, respecting others and leading a moral life -- are found in many different faiths, whether that religion is based on a belief in a Godhead or not.”

Christianity teaches that too, Bob Ray, but for some reason Christians fail to practice it. Mohandas Gandhi, when asked about Christianity, famously stated, “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

Indeed Christianity seems to have a problem when it comes to reason and rationality, but Christianity is not alone in that respect. All religions seem to be based on a foundation of “we were the first… we are the chosen… we are the best… our god can beat up your god…”

This is evident even in the early teachings of the Native American tribal spiritual beliefs. The name by which every tribe called themselves translated to some version or another of “the people,” or “the humans.” All others are damned.

Bob Ray says it well:

“That's just the way it is with some folks: If you don't believe what I believe, Christian or not, hell is definitely reserved for you.”

Bob Ray’s opinion piece is on the mark in many ways, but even he misses what is arguably the real error in thought process seen in this discussion.

Buddhism is not a religion. The Buddha is respected as a great teacher, but is not a god. Buddhists do praise the man, but they do not pray to him. Buddhism, as a practice, is godless.

Not all Buddhists are atheists, but many are. There are Buddhists who believe in a god, and those beliefs may parallel the practice of Buddhism… compliment it, perhaps… but there are no Buddhist teachings incorporating a deity. Most Buddhists will tell you they simply don’t know if there is a god or not, but they do know there was a Buddha.

Buddhism has no place in an on-air debate about religions. Buddhists don't have a dog in that hunt. The reason it was mentioned, first by the host and then by the caller, is that modern Christians are taught that Buddhism is a pagan religious practice, and therefore is a thing to be rejected and reviled. Buddhists, like all pagans, are going to hell.

Revisionism at its finest.
~~

We the People

Isn’t it interesting what our kids don’t learn in school?

Even many educated people seem never to have learned that some of the earliest British colonies were corporations chartered by the King of England. Take for instance the 1628 creation of the Governor and Company of Massachusetts Bay, granted to a group of Puritans. The result was a theocratic Massachusetts with political power held by staunch Puritanical believers.

In 1636 we see the chartering of the Rhode Island colony by a group of disaffected Massachusetts Bay folk, then the Connecticut colony followed in 1662. These early American corporations were forced under terms of their charter to deal strictly with the British East India Company, and under some very disadvantageous terms.

That was the way it was until the American Revolution, which began as a rebellion more against the East India Company than of the Crown.

Our founders held a deep distrust of corporations. So much so that Thomas Jefferson offered freedom from monopolies as part of our Bill of Rights. The proposal failed to gain acceptance, and later Jefferson wrote, "I hope that we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." [1]

But corporations survived, and in 1886 SCOTUS inadvertently decided that a private corporation is the same as a person, and entitled to the same Constitutional protections as any other person.

The Controversy

The case that did it was Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad (1886), and according to the records, Associate Justice Morrison Remick Waite, before the opening of argument, stated aloud that “[t]he court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of opinion that it does.”

The court reporter, former judge and lawyer J.C. Bancroft Davis, later entered into the summary record of the Court's findings that, “The defendant Corporations are persons within the intent of the clause in section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Thus Davis took Waite’s words, twisted them and granted something to corporations which was never even discussed. It was never the intent of SCOTUS to make that statement, and the full text of the opinion says no such thing. The case was brought as a complaint by the railroad about the taxing of fences bordering rail lines, and the railroad won. There were no arguments relating to corporate personhood or corporate rights under the First Amendment. The whole corporate personhood thing is a sham.

Corporate personhood came to be simply because of an off the cuff statement of a single justice, and the brief summary written by Court Reporter Davis. Davis himself becomes suspect in a fraud, and it has been alleged that he was bribed. After 150 years we shall never know for certain, but it is perhaps relevant that Davis was the former president of Newburgh and New York Railway Company.

The concept of corporate personhood generates some interesting questions. If the corporation enjoys the same rights as a person under the First Amendment, would it not also enjoy equally the rights protected by the full Constitution and all the amendments? Should a corporation have the right to vote? Join the military? Marry your daughter? Be called for jury duty? If a corporation is suspected of a crime, can it be remanded for trial?

I think probably not, and I further think that allowing corporations shelter under the First Amendment is a disastrous idea. Since the Constitution makes no mention of corporations, it seems clear that the law that has been promulgated under this “decision” is an attempt at rewriting the Constitution to suit the needs of the corporation, and nothing more. The fears of our founders have been realized.

"Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."

Abraham Lincoln wrote these words[2] in 1864, twelve years before Bancroft Davis took it upon himself to grant the protections of our Constitution to the very entity Lincoln, and our founders, despised.

[1] The Populist Moment: A Short History of the Agrarian Revolt in America, Goodwyn, L.

[2] Abraham Lincoln: A New Portrait, Hertz, E.

~~

Why you can call the President names and get away with it

The freedom of expression being enjoyed today by the various right wingnuts was not a pleasure always enjoyed by American citizens. As recently as the middle of last century, calling any elected official such names as “socialist,” “fascist,” or ”Nazi” could have been grounds for a liable judgment… or worse.

This story has roots in the 1955 Montgomery, Alabama bus boycott (remember Rosa Parks?). In response to the Montgomery political machine’s actions, both during and after the decision in Browder V. Gayle, four black ministers decided to seek help and funding for the cause of segregation. They composed and paid for an advertisement to be placed in the New York Times, critical of a recalcitrant south. Montgomery elected officials responded by suing the four, including Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy, for defamation. The first of these actions, awarded by a state court and resulting in a $500,000 judgment against the Times, was later overturned by the Supreme Court.

In New York Times v. Sullivan (1960), SCOTUS ruled the existing common law of defamation of public officials violated free speech guarantees. The Warren Court held a citizen's right to criticize government officials to be of such tremendous importance in a free society that we could accommodate it only by tolerance of such criticism, even though the charges might eventually be determined to contain incorrect allegations.

In Sullivan, SCOTUS eliminated common law presumption of falsity and malice, and laid the burden of proof on the plaintiff to show that, at the time the defamatory statements were made, the defendant either knew them to be false, or showed reckless disregard as to the veracity of the statements. In other words, the onus was on the plaintiff to prove first that he was harmed, and secondly that the defendant did it on purpose. Until this ruling, only the harm provision required proof.

The social and political context of the times certainly influenced their decision. The source of the alleged defamation was an editorial advertisement placed in the New York Times, titled "Heed Their Rising Voices". Without naming names, the advertisement pointed caustically to the ongoing segregation dominating southern states, in spite of many court rulings prohibiting the practice. Some very prominent, well-respected individuals lent their name to the advertisement, including one of the leading names in fairness and desegregation of the time; Eleanor Roosevelt.

The advertisement detailed grievances, described abuses, and asked for financial support for the desegregation cause. Justice Brennan described the group sponsoring the advertisement as one "whose existence and objectives are matters of the highest public interest and concern." Justice Black described the controversial heart of the suit as “[O]ne of the acute and highly emotional issues in this country.” Black further described the efforts of many people, public officials included, who continued to enforce racial segregation in public schools and other public places, “despite our several holdings that such a state practice is forbidden by the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Plaintiff Sullivan, a white elected commissioner from Montgomery, Alabama, in claiming that he was personally injured by the advertisement, had several hurdles that he failed to clear. The advertisement did not mention him by name. Only 35 copies of the offending publication were circulated in that city, and only 394 in the entire state. The original trial that found the Times liable took place in a segregated courtroom, in Montgomery, before a white judge and all-white jury.

In overturning the verdict, SCOTUS viewed the libel action as a very serious attack not only on 1A freedoms, but on the desegregation of the southern states. In Justice Black’s words, the Court was concerned that a large damage award would threaten "an American press virile enough to publish unpopular views on public affairs and bold enough to criticize the conduct of public officials."

SCOTUS was further concerned because another libel verdict of $500,000 had already been awarded against the Times to another Montgomery elected official who was making the same claims as Sullivan, and 11 other libel suits arising out of the same advertisement were pending.

However, probably the greatest motivating factor for this radical change to previously sacrosanct common law was a judicial view to the effect that the statements of public officials, coming "within the outer perimeter of their duties" were privileged unless actual malice was proved.

The rationale behind this privilege, originating in Barr v. Matteo (1959), was that the threat of damage suits would "dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible, in the unflinching discharge of their duties," SCOTUS, in the Sullivan decision, decided that parallel considerations supported protection for critics of the government and of elected officials.

Thus honest citizens may protest the actions of the government or any elected official, so long as they do not intentionally lie, or act with reckless disregard of the harm they may cause.

For the full history of this landmark case, please read New York Times Co. V. Sullivan Forty Years Later: Retrospective, Perspective , by W. Wat Hopkins.

~~

The Right gets it Wrong Again

The scandalously left-wing Think Progress reports on the following:

This morning, in an interview with MSNBC morning anchor Meredith Vieira, Newt Gingrich got it wrong again. The following is an exchange regarding a question on the Obama/Chavez meeting, the handshake and smile:

VIEIRA: But do you think he should not be trying to mend relationships with other world leaders?

GINGRICH: How do you mend relationships with somebody who hates your country, who actively calls for the destruction of your country and who wants to undermine you?

VIEIRA: But we certainly have mended relationships with countries that have hated us in the past. Russia comes to mind, China comes to mind.

GINGRICH: But we didn’t rush over, smile, and greet Russian dictators. We understood who they were.

Well, old Newt is a former history professor and should know better, but obviously knowing better and speaking truth don’t connect for Mr. Gingrich.



The Nixon photo dates to 1973. Shrub’s photo with Putin was taken June 16, 2001. In fact, the only American President not photographed grinning with a Ruskie in hand over the past 40 years is Jimmy Carter.

Watch the video here:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

~~