02 Dec 2004
Arrests at Saudi reformers' trial

Ah yes, Saudi Arabia, proud member of the "Free World":

Ali al-Demaini, Matruq al-Faleh and Abdullah al-Hamed are accused of campaigning for political change and a constitutional monarchy.

They are also charged with collecting signatures for a petition demanding change.

Why does US foreign policy so stridently condemn Cuba for the same types of abuses and yet remain nearly silent on these outrageous actions by some of the last absolute monarchs on earth? When was the last time Castro sponsored terrorist groups? How many of the 9/11 hijackers were citizens of that bucolic island paradise? What could possibly account for the difference in US treatment of these two repressive regimes? Here's a hint - it's a single world, three letters long, and it starts with 'o' and ends with 'l'.

Nine people are detained after access is denied to a Saudi court trying three reformists, witnesses say.

(link) [BBC News | World | UK Edition]

00:00 /Politics | 0 comments | permanent link

Study suggests nutrient decline in garden crops over past 50 years

Another effect of the industrialization of agriculture...

A recent study of 43 garden crops led by a University of Texas at Austin biochemist suggests that their nutrient value has declined in recent decades while farmers have been planting crops designed to improve other traits. The study was designed to investigate the effects of modern agricultural methods on the nutrient content of foods. The researchers chose garden crops, mostly vegetables, but also melons and strawberries, for which nutritional data were available from both 1950 and 1999 and compared them both individually and as a group.

(link) [Science Blog]

00:00 /Agriculture | 0 comments | permanent link

The 9/11 Bubble

A fine call by Thomas Friedman for fiscal sanity in a crazed world ...

It is now clear to me that we have followed the dot-com bubble with the 9/11 bubble. Both bubbles made us stupid. The first was financed by reckless investors, and the second by a reckless administration and Congress. In the first case, the public was misled by Wall Street stock analysts, who told them the old rules didn't apply - that elephants can fly. In the second case, the public was misled by White House economists, peddling similar nonsense. The first ended in tears, and so will the second. Because, as the dot-com bubble proved, elephants can fly - "provided it is not very long."

(link) [New York Times]

via My Apple Menu/Reader

00:00 /Politics | 0 comments | permanent link