Month: March 2012

Does This Explain Anything?

It is now early on a Saturday and my cleansing of my mind has begun….AH!  It is almost orgasmic!

And yes….more sciencey stuff!

For years I have been trying to explain the knuckle dragger in both parties.  I have asked many times if anyone could explain what it is that leads these types to do and say the idiotic stuff that they become famous for…..and so far …there has been no good answer just a wealth of opinions and insults.  But I do believe that the answer has been found…….

(Newser) – In decoding the DNA of a western lowland gorilla, scientists made a discovery that may surprise you: Humans and gorillas differ in just 1.75% of their DNA, making our genomes more similar than previously thought. That percentage actually drops to 1.37% when compared to chimpanzees, our closest living relatives—but 15% of the time, gorilla DNA is actually more like human DNA than chimp DNA is, the Los Angeles Times reports. That “tells us that there are individual genes for which, if you want to find the closest sequence to humans, you won’t necessarily look at chimpanzees. In a few cases, you’ll look at gorillas,” says a geneticist.

It took a 60-strong team five years to sequence the 20,962 genes, which belong to Kamilah, a 34-year-old gorilla at the San Diego Zoo. Other lessons learned: Gorillas became a separate species 10 million years ago, about 4 million years before humans split off from chimps—a finding that jibes with fossil evidence, but stands in contrast to previous genetic evidence, which had indicated a more recent separation. “That’s significant,” says an anthropologist. “There’s an argument about early hominids—are they really our ancestors? This helps settle that. It shows it’s possible.”

Whatcha think?

2012 Anal-Ocity #15

More anal statements coming from our “trusted” news media.

I am an aging hippie (at least that is what I have been labelled with in the past)…..I remember the embarrassment that FOX’s Geraldo Rivera has heaped on himself…..first, it was he was hit in the face by a neo-Nazi with a chair that broke his nose and then there was his famous Capone vault debacle that was nothing short of amazingly hilarious when the the big deal was opened and there was not even rat crap in it……but he strikes again!

We all have heard the reports of this teen in Florida, Trayvon Martin, that was killed by a man while walking home from a store……some blame the man, others blame the teen but good old Geraldo has his idea and that idea is moronic….and being moronic lets him enter into the world of anal-ocities……

In his show he made this statement…..

Rivera: I believe that George Zimmerman, the overzealous neighborhood watch captain, should be investigated to the fullest extent of the law and if he is criminally liable, he should be prosecuted. But I am urging the parents of black and Latino youngsters particularly to not let their children go out wearing hoodies. I think the hoodie is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was.

So, according to Geraldo a fashion choice is to blame for a death and NOT the asshole with a 9mm!

I guess that means we can blame a women’s fashion choice of a mini skirt or short shorts for her rape…

the gun did not kill the teen…..Zimmerman did not kill the teen……it was the teen’s fashion choice that is to blame.

The New Ryan Budget (Again)

It is that time again….the House repubs think they have ammo that they can use with this new budget offered up by Paul Ryan……it reads a lot like the budget he offered up last year or so…..and of course they (the Repubs) will offer up the excuse that Obama has not giving a budget in over 400 days, I believe or maybe it is 4000 days, who knows….no matter what it is lame, but it will be the defense…..

When I started writing this I wanted to give my readers a synopsis of the plan….but thereis no way to summarize it without leaving something important out…..so I turned to a bloggers best friend….the internet and found this from townhall.com…….

On Spending – The Path to Prosperity spends $3.53 Trillion in FY 2013, a number that grows to $4.88 Trillion by the end of the decade.  It restores full military funding to pre-Budget Control Act sequestration levels, off-setting those dollars elsewhere and preventing a harmful gutting of our national defense.   It reduces spending by $5 Trillion over the next ten years, compared to Obama’s budget.  It restores federal spending to the historical norm of 20 percent of GDP by 2015.

On Deficits – Ryan’s blueprint reduces budget deficits by $3 Trillion over the coming decade, relative to Obama’s budget.  Although it doesn’t happen immediately, and unlike Obama’s plan, this budget balances.  Within the current decade window, it comes closest to primary balance by achieving a $166 Billion annual deficit in 2018 (to put that into perspective, 2010’s deficit under this president was $1.6 Trillion).  The closest Obama’s budget comes to primary balance is a $617 Billion shortfall in 2017, which is still roughly double the size of President Bush’s average deficit.

On Debt – Unlike President Obama’s unflinching debt express, the GOP budget’s lowers spending and enacts crucial reforms to chart a more sustainable debt course, allowing the United States to gradually begin paying down the national debt.  The plan would retire the publicly-held debt by the 2050’s.  Gross debt reached 100 percent of US GDP this year, an alarming tipping point — yet President Obama’s new budget offers ever higher debt in perpetuity:

On Taxes – This proposal aims to stabilize revenues at the historical average of 18 to 19 percent of GDP.  It adopts a concept endorsed by the president’s fiscal commission by drastically simplifying the tax code, reducing the complex series of income brackets to just two: 10 and 25 percent.  (A large majority of Americans support a single flat tax rate; this is slightly more progressive, but is still a vast improvement).  While the highest tax bracket would be 25 percent of income — a level that a healthy majority of Americans view as “fair” — the plan would also phase out and eliminate special tax loopholes and spending in the tax code.  This would disproportionally affect higher-income earners.  Slightly revising President Obama’s recently-introduced plan, the Ryan budget would also cut US corporate tax rates from the current sky-high 35 percent to 25 percent.  (Obama’s preferred reduction would be three percentage points higher, at 28 percent).  In exchange for a lower, pro-growth rate, corporations would also lose various write-offs, loopholes, and corporate welfare.  In sum, the tax code would be made far flatter, more predictable, and simpler for everyone.

On Medicaid and Social Security – Like last year’s budget, Paul Ryan’s 2013 iteration would block grant federal Medicaid contributions to the states, allowing state governments the flexibility to better meet their citizens’ needs.  The new Ryan budget also steers clear of committing to any specific Social Security fixes, instead requiring the president and Congress to advance bipartisan solutions.  Attempting to simultaneously reform two popular but unsustainable entitlement programs is a massive political risk.  Conservatives would likely prefer to see a bold plan on Social Security, too, but Ryan is picking his battles wisely.  The longevity of Social Security can at least be enhanced with a few basic changes, including means-testing for income and slowly raising the retirement age to keep pace with life expectancy.  By comparison, Medicare is the far bigger problem with much more red ink attached to it.

On Medicare – This was the source of so much Left-wing hysteria last year, and will again be a major focus in this election year.  Democrats, buoyed by their success in upstate New York last year, have been salivating over the chance to employ “Mediscare” against Republicans in the fall.  To mitigate these attacks, Paul Ryan has done something very clever.  He’s significantly tweaked his previous premium support model to incorporate a bipartisan solution he co-authored with liberal Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon.  Like Mitt Romney’s plan, which Ryan has all but endorsed, this revised approach maintains last year’s responsible and generous plan, but adds traditional fee-for-service Medicare as an option for future seniors.  When younger workers retire, they’ll choose from among a host of private plans, plus the current Medicare model, and will be offered Medicare premiums from the government support to pay for these plans.   The plans will compete for future seniors’ business.  Richer and healthier future seniors will receive lower levels of support; less wealthy and less healthy future seniors will receive significantly higher support.  The benchmark for premium assistance levels would be the cost of the second-lowest private plan or the current fee-for-service model, whichever is lower.  (The increase in total program spending would be indexed to GDP growth, plus 0.5 percent)  All plans would be required to provide the range of coverage that today’s seniors enjoy.  As was the case last year, these reforms would not affect anyone over the age of 55.  At all.  As Democrats prepare to reprise their 2011 lie of the year by cynically claiming that Ryan’s budget “ends Medicare as we know it,” let’s recall that basic math ends Medicare, period, within the next 12 years.  That’s the issue that must be addressed to save the program.  Republicans are offering their solution, which is now partially based on a new bipartisan compromise proposal.  Most Democrats’ position on the matter can best be summed up by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who offered this brave commentary on entitlement reform at a budget hearing last month:

Other notable items – The 2013 Ryan budget also repeals Obamacare (most Americans cheer) and the Medicare rationing board known as IPAB, offering a market-based alternative to take its place.  It calls for a reduction of executive regulations flowing from entities such as the EPA and NLRB, and suggests an end to counterproductive moratoriums that limit safe domestic energy production.  The plan ends bailouts and winds down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  The plan seeks to curb the explosion of food stamps usage, which has shot up from 28 million to nearly 47 million over the last four years alone.  The Path to Prosperity would ensure that those in need would continue to receive help, but would also replicate successful welfare reform tactics such as work requirements, time limits, and aggressive anti-fraud efforts.

There you have it…read it and decide for yourself……..to me it is the same lame policies that the GOP has been throwing about for the last 4 years, probably longer……I know…A lot of info to digest but before you can make a valid judgment you need facts….whether you like them or not…….

So Now I Am A Nazi! Go Figure!

In my years of activism and radical political thought I have been called many things….a pinko, a commie, a bastard, etc etc…..but the one I have missed I all those years was…….a Nazi.  I figured that with my political views I could eliminate that one as an insult to my beliefs……but I was mistaken!  I am officially a NAZI!

First, I am pro-choice and I know that some of my readers are not……I seldom debate the value of either because no matter how much we twist and shout….our opinions on the subject will stay the same and in these exchanges tempers flair and stuff is said that should not have been said……..I respect my friends that are pro-life and I would hope that they will respect my views also…..

With that said, I am officially a NAZI!  I know….I know….why would I say that?  It was not me that says that but a person on the Right…….

Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber, at least, has been very open about this.  Just a few weeks ago, he plainly stated that those who support marriage equality or a reproductive rights are “on the wrong side of history” and “advocating things that are equally as horrific” as what the Nazis did.

But just in case that wasn’t clear enough, Barber followed it up today with a another Bonhoeffer/Nazi comparison where he explicitly stated that he is comparing those who support a woman’s right to choose to the Nazis

Let’s be very clear here. What we’re talking about here is, as we’ve long called it, an abortion holocaust. Are we comparing the pro-choice movement to the Nazi movement? Yes! Absolutely.

In recent weeks we talked about how the pro-life movement really embraces the mantle of Dietrich Bonhoeffer …This is the modern-day anti-holocaust movement; the pro-life movement is.

And, you know, I was, a few months ago, in the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC and I was taken by how the arguments that the Nazis made in order to dehumanize the Jews are the same arguments that we hear coming from the so-called pro-choice movement to dehumanize the unborn child.

There you have it….it is official!  According to Barber I am a NAZI!

I try to avoid using insulting language to describe one of my political opponents…..and I will take the high ground here and only say…..if his IQ ever makes it to 80 he should sell!

What Is This “Economic Freedom”?

This is  continuation of my post yesterday,  “Where  Is This “Free Market”?

I have heard the term, economic freedom used for many elections and this one is No different….Mitt has started using it as his latest bumper sticker to impress voters.  But what is this “Economic Freedom” he speaks of in Illinois?  Did the slogan help him win in the prairie state?

I have studied economics in the past and I do not have a handy definition I can offer up….and let me interject here that academics are paid big bucks for the knowledge and their brilliance to obfuscate……so like any good techie I went to the internet, especially answers.com….

Economic freedom is a term used in economic and policy debates.  As with freedom generally, there are various definitions, but no universally accepted concept of economic freedom. One major approach to economic freedom comes from classical liberal and libertarian traditions emphasizing free markets and private property, while another extends the welfare economics study of individual choice, with greater economic freedom coming from a “larger” (in some technical sense) set of possible choices. Another more philosophical perspective emphasizes its context in distributive justice and basic freedoms of all individuals. Other conceptions of economic freedom include freedom from want and the freedom to engage in collective bargaining.

The free market viewpoint understands economic liberty as the freedom to produce, trade and consume any goods and services acquired without the use of force, fraud or theft.   This is embodied in the rule of law, property rights and freedom of contract, and characterized by external and internal openness of the markets, the protection of property rights and freedom of economic initiative. There are several indices of economic freedom that attempt to measure free market economic freedom.   Empirical studies based on these rankings have found higher living standards, economic growth, income equality, less corruption and less political violence to be correlated with free market.

Mitt’s ranting about the subject….what does he really mean?  Well first of all, it is election time and No one but him knows what he means……because it is election time he is lying….why?  His lips are moving.  But since Mitt is so strong for economic freedom what does he mean of all the different definitions?

You decide!  I think he is just campaigning and has no idea what he means when his speech writers throw the concept into his latest stump.

Would You Vote On A Saturday?

For years the American people have not been too enthusiastic about their duty to vote……we can blame lots of things for this trend……distrust, only 2 parties, no attractive candidate, apathy…..on and on….but when we are talking about the general election for the president of the United states….we are talking about the first Tuesday in November…..and that is part of the problem, in my opinion.

Polls open when most people are headed to work and close when people are trying to get home after a dreadful day at the office….kids, work, relationships, etc all keep people from the polls…in other words life keeps them from voting.  Can there be a solution found for this problem?

I think there is a pretty good shot to fixing this problem…….

Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) and Rep. John Larson (D-CT) have introduced legislation that would let Americans vote on the first full weekend in November instead of the first Tuesday, ABC News reports.

“Tuesday was chosen as Election Day in 1845, when Congress decreed it the most convenient day for farmers — they needed three days to travel to their voting place without interfering with three days of religious worship. Reformers say the law is outdated and now interferes with workers’ plans, particularly people working more than one job or single parents who have responsibilities that might eclipse voting.”

I think changing the day to vote to a Saturday would be in the best interest of the country….it would be a more simple answer to the dwindling voter rates….

Where Is This “Free Market”?

It is election time and all the candidates have a talking about the “free markets”……but what is the free market they speak of endlessly?  Everybody on the campaign trial has some policy that mention the obscure policy of free markets.

First of all,  contrary to popular belief there is NO field of study in economics called free markets…..a definition from Investopedia……In simple terms, a free market is a summary term for an array of exchanges that take place in society. Each exchange is a voluntary agreement between two parties who trade in the form of goods and services. In reality, this is the extent to which a free market exists since there will always be government intervention in the form of taxes, price controls and restrictions that prevent new competitors from entering a market. Just like supply-side economics, free market is a term used to describe a political or ideological viewpoint on policy and is not a field within economics.

If this is a catch all phrase and a bumper sticker in waiting, why is it so important?

Basically, what the politicians, both flavors, are talking about is really multinational corporations.  In today’s economy there is no local players it is all global and in as such more and more not a free market.  And today’s world offers no real free markets because of the imperfections withing the capitalist theory.  the main players in this new global economy, the multinationals, have extinguished the dream of a truly free market.

For instance, price fixing flies in the face of the old theory of supply and demand by controlling the prices…the oil industry is a good example of this,……in a world where the corporation controls both ends of the chain, the supply and the demand, the idea of market mechanisms does not apply.

There are a couple of things that multinationals have done that has turned them into the conquerors of the colonialism days……there is very little marketplace, it is give as little as possible while extracting as much as possible, they many times export more capital from developing countries than they bring in, they have intensified poverty instead of helping eliminate it, they effectively edge out the native entrepreneurs and finally, use the military to insure their continuing oligarchy.

Thus the multinationals have made a mockery of the idea of free markets…..and turns the very idea into so much nonsense.

So please keep all this in mind while you listen to your candidates go on and on about some obscure policy such as the “free market”!

Did You Get Your Money’s Worth?

WE always bitch about the work that Congress does or in most cases does NOT do…..I have often wondered if we had gotten our money’s worth….my guess is NO…NO where near our money’s worth…..and thanx to Bankrupting America we have some figures on this subject…….

Last week taxpayers spent roughly $100 million on Congress.

Salaries of Members of Congress and their allowances/week:

Speaker of the House: $223,500/52 = $4,299

House and Senate Majority and Minority Leaders: ($193,400/52) x 4 = $14,877

Other Representatives and Senators: ($174,000/52) x 530 = $1,773,462

Average weekly budget for all House offices: ($1,446,009/52) x 435 = $2,096,421

Average weekly budget for all Senate offices: ($3,409,093/52) x 100 = $6,555,958

Non-salary money allocated for Congress: $4.656 billion/52 = $89,538,462

What you got

As noted above, the House the House was not in session. The chamber will be back this week. To recap, so far this year, the chamber has voted to approve only two bills that would cut spending:

H.R. 3835, To extend the pay limitation for Members of Congress and Federal employees. SAVINGS: Unknown

H.R. 1173, Fiscal Responsibility and Retirement Security Act. SAVINGS: $9 million over five years

During debate on the transportation bill, the Senate voted 40 to 58 against an amendment offered by Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) to lower the FY13 discretionary budget authority cap by $11 million in order to offset the general fund transfers to the Highway Trust Fund. The chamber also rejected 26-72 an amendment offered by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) to get rid of certain energy tax subsidies in exchange for a decrease in the corporate income tax rate.

And that was last week and if they are still on schedule set up in 2010 they are off a week which means that we pay them to go home a play golf and schmooze with their owners, the high stake donors…..

My Take On ‘Drill Baby Drill’

Gas prices are on the rise and the president will be taking hits from his political opponents…..and as predictable as the sun will rise is the bumper sticker attacks and answers….like Drill Baby Drill…….before one can use the bumper sticker solutions they need to be aware of what is involved with the politics of oil……

First, let us look at the tax incentives for oil companies that the GOP is trying hard to protect….

Theodore Seto, a professor of tax law and policy at Loyola Law School Los Angeles, notes the distortion in the tax code toward investment in oil exploration with “the U.S. tax rate on profits from petroleum and natural gas structures … the lowest imposed on any type of corporate capital asset”:

Why Oil Companies Don’t Drill, Understanding Tax: U.S. oil companies are pushing hard to get Congress to allow the current Administration to issue more oil leases before its term expires. In response, skeptics have noted that three-quarters of the 90 million-plus acres of federal land already leased for oil drilling are not being worked. Oil companies deny this. Regardless of who is right, the number of operating oil rigs in North America declined across the course of 2007.

In the meantime, OPEC has raised its quotas by only 20% since 1998 – a measly 2% per year. World GDP grew by about 85% over the same period. The International Energy Agency reports that non-OPEC oil countries are also underproducing and predicts that they will continue to do so.

Everyone seems to be holding back. … So what to do?

On the tax side, Congress has done almost all it can do to stimulate U.S. production.

A 2005 Congressional Budget Office study concluded that the effective 2002 U.S. tax rate on profits from petroleum and natural gas structures was the lowest imposed on any type of corporate capital asset: 9.2%. Profits from computers, by contrast, were taxed at an effective rate of 36.9%.

A 2000 study by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy concluded that in 1998, of all U.S. industries, petroleum and pipeline companies were taxed at the lowest effective rates: 5.7%. Health care companies, by contrast, were taxed at an effective rate of 32%.

If tax incentives were going to induce U.S. oil companies to drill, they probably would have done so by now. Interestingly, Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama both propose to eliminate oil production tax incentives. After all, if oil companies are not responding by increasing production, those breaks are just gifts from you and me to Exxon. …

Remember that prices are a measure of value. If oil prices are going to be much higher 10 years from now, that means oil will be more valuable then than it is now. Valuable to us.

If so, should it really be our policy to drain U.S. reserves as quickly as possible? Or should our policy be to save at least some of those reserves for the day when gas is $10/gallon?

More domestic drilling will lower gas prices here in the US…….is that true?  From CNN Money…….

The problem is this: While increased oil and gas drilling in the United States may create good-paying jobs, reduce reliance on foreign oil and lower the trade deficit, it will have hardly any impact on gas and oil prices.

That’s because the amount of extra oil that could be produced from more drilling in this country is tiny compared to what the world consumes.

Plus, any extra oil the country did produce would likely be quickly offset by a cut in OPEC production.

“This drill drill drill thing is tired,” said Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at the Oil Price Information Service, which calculates gas prices for the motorist organization AAA. “It’s a simplistic way of looking for a solution that doesn’t exist.”

After OPEC got done adjusting its production to reflect the increased American output, gas prices might drop a whopping 3 cents a gallon, the study said.

“More production from anywhere would tend to lower prices,” said Adam Sieminski, chief energy economist at Deutsche Bank. “But the amount that we’re talking about domestically, it wouldn’t move gas prices from $4 a gallon to $3.”

In fact, more domestic oil is just what we’ve been seeing and gasoline prices are still going up.

The next talking point that the GOP and its spokespeople use is that most of the domestic oil production in the US is on private land and the oil companies want public lands open to drilling……why?

My thought is that it would be more expensive for the oil companies on private land and that they could have their friends n Congress see that they get a free ride while drilling on public land….but could this be the case, really?

The magazine, Economist is reporting……

The main problem is that Congress obviously doesn’t want to be handing out royalty-free drilling leases on sites that would be commercially attractive even at the going rate. That’s just handing out taxpayer money to a few corporations for no good reason; among other things, it’s not fair to other drillers who have to pay for their leases. And when the price of crude goes above a certain level, those tough-to-develop deepwater wells become commercially attractive even without the free leases. So Congress sensibly instructed the Minerals Management Service (MMS) to award these free leases only when the price of oil was at a level low enough that they wouldn’t otherwise be profitable to exploit.Whoops! We all remember the MMS, right? So apparently, in 1998-99, the folks at the MMS were too busy flirting with each other, or accepting private-jet rides to college football games, or whatever, to notice that the price of oil had gotten pretty high and they shouldn’t be handing out free leases anymore. As a result, 24 companies got free leases they shouldn’t have gotten. And ever since, they’ve been making extra money that they really ought to be returning in the form of leases on public property to the American taxpayer. As of 2008, the bill came to $1.3 billion; this year, the losses will be $1.5 billion. Over the decades-long lifetime of the wells it’ll add up to a lot more. According to the Government Accountability Office it’ll come to $53 billion over the next 25 years. Last week, representative Ed Markey and a few other Democrats on the House Natural Resources Committee offered an amendment to the Republican budget bill to make those oil producers pay the standard amount in the future on the royalty-free leases they mistakenly received due to bureaucratic error. The amendment was voted down, 251-174

Oh, one more thing. Some years back, Shell, BP, and two other oil companies that also mistakenly received royalty-free leases signed agreements with the federal government to voluntarily pay the normal lease on their wells from that date on. They probably did so less out of any concern for fairness to the American taxpayer than out of a desire to avoid the possibility that the government would try to retroactively recover leases for prior years. Nonetheless, voluntarily agreeing to pay the royalties going forward was the right thing to do. So, in the spirit of encouraging good behaviour: Shell and BP, good show. Chevron and the other guys, you need to go sit in the corner for a while and think about what behaviour this situation calls for.

It now is making more sense!  Public land drilling would make the companies more profits with less overhead….and that is what capitalism is all about, right?  Keeping capitalism in mind….would the price of gas come down?  My guess would be ….NO!

I hope this post will help those that think ‘Drill Baby Drill’ is the answer to all our oil and gas problems…..the solutions that are used in these political times will only benefit the oil companies and you and your Hummer will still be using and buying high price gas.

If you really want lower gas prices then focus on…..speculation…..control that and you can somewhat control prices.

Drill Baby Drill is a slogan, a bumper sticker not a viable policy….

Who Was That Masked Woman?

College of Political Knowledge

Subject:  Women’s History

Once again it is march and Women’s history month……..and keeping with my tradition I pick a woman that I feel has contributed much and is little known by the outside world…..this yer I have chosen Gertrude Bell…..an Englishwoman that had an enormous effect on today’s world……

Everybody, well most everybody, knows of T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia) and his contribution to the efforts during and after WW1……but there was another person that deserves as much attention as does Lawrence….That person is Gertrude Bell (1868-1926)…….

A short biography from Write Spirit……..

Born in County Durham on July 14th 1868 to a family of great prosperity, Gertrude Bell was the daughter of the great Industrialist, Isaac Lowthian Bell. This wealth was later used to finance Gertrude’s later travels around the world. At the age of 16 Gertrude went down to Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford where she became the first woman to achieve a first in History, after only 2 years of study. Thereafter she travelled to countries such as Iran, Mesopotamia, Jerusalem and Switzerland. She developed a passion for archaeology and mountaineering in the French Alps, (she become one of the best female mountain climbers.) Her fascination with Arabic culture led her to learn many languages including Arabic. In Jerusalem she is said to have dressed up as a man in order to investigate the mysterious world of the Druze community.

In 1915 Gertrude Bell volunteered for service with the Red Cross in France but shortly after she was summoned to Cairo where she worked on behalf of the Cairo office who were helping to ferment a rebellion of the Arabs against the Turks. Because of her intricate knowledge and personal dealings with the Arab tribes Gertrude was able to offer a wealth of information that was used by T.E.Lawrence and others in the successful Arab revolt. In 1916 she arrived in Basra and was able to draw maps helping the British army reach Baghdad. Bell was the only commissioned female officer in the British army and for her work she was later awarded the C.B.E

After the war and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Bell was instrumental in first negotiating the borders of Iraq and then persuading Churchill to accept Faisal as the new King of Iraq. Bell then acted as an adviser to Faisal, leading some to comment she was the “uncrowned Queen of Iraq” It is said Gertrude Bell and great skill in persuading politicians about her own viewpoint.

Unfortunately the new nation of Iraq proved to be rather artificial leading to conflicts between different tribes. The British presence was increasingly resented and disliked leading to a long period of violent and costly confrontation. It is perhaps surprising the striking similarities to the present situation are rarely mentioned.

After the situation in Iraq began to be a little more stable, Gertrude was able to pursue her interest in archaeology. She founded the Baghdad Archaeology Museum with its extensive collection of artifacts dating back into antiquity and the times of Babylon. Gertrude Bell was a pioneer in calling for national treasures to be kept in the country of origin. The Baghdad Museum used to be one of the world’s most prestigious archaeological museums.

Unfortunately the brilliant life of Gertrude Bell came to a tragic conclusion in July 1926. A tribal rebellion against the British backed regime made the situation in Iraq discouraging and depressing. Beset by illness,  and perhaps a sense of personal loneliness she took her own life with an overdose of sleeping pills.

A strong woman that needs to be appreciated more than she is……as a student of the Middle East I studied her and her accomplishments….I found her a fascinating person and a fascinating intellect….and her story is a compelling one that needs to be told and told often…..