Republicans Make US Government Look Bad

Reference: this article

Summary of article: Republicans, some high ranking officials, have e-mail addresses with the Republican National Committee and the contents of those accounts have been deleted.

On this surface this isn't a big deal. Technically speaking, the RNC is a private organization. The members of our government are also private individuals.

The problem arises that is it possible to be a servant of the government at high levels and continue to have private communications that are completely separate from their private lives especially in regard to political party communications. Communications of public officials need to be saved and recorded and available for review in the case that they use private communications for official communications.


The deletion of these e-mails and e-mail accounts raises the possibility of unethical, illegal or problematic communications having occurred in this medium. As an official, they should have known that such activity would raise concerns - and once again on an international stage questions are raised about just how 'good' our government is.

So, the web site and Chinese news outlet Xinhua writes an article that really just has the implication that our government is infiltrated with corruption. Certainly, there isn't any question of the appearance of impropriety. The question is, was there illegal activity?

A question that might be extremely difficult to answer given the deletion of the e-mail accounts and e-mails.

But then again, as a member of the programming population of the world, I understand that few things are completely deleted.

Implications of Scientists Discussing Religion

A recent article related a discussion in the upper echelons of scientists about the decision to allign themselves with mainstream religion in the fight against anti-science.

As you can well imagine Professor Dawkins was one of the scientists on this panel. Two other scientists were on the panel: The Astronomer Royale, Martin Rees and Steve Jones.

If you read the article carefully you can come up with some implications of the discussion.

1) The Astronomer Royal, Richard Dawkins and Steve Jones are all atheists.
2) The assumption in their conversation is that their intended audience (scientists) are also all atheists.

The three were sharply divided on the topic of aligning themselves with mainstream religion. The Astronomer Royal wants the alignment, Dawkins and Jones did not. It is, of course, amazing that someone in public should actually agree with anything Dawkins says on the topic of religion. Most commentary about Dawkins is so derogatory, inflamed and wild claims that he is a 'fanatic' or bringing about fundamentalist atheism are shouted when he calmly talks about the problems inherent in religion.

The major problem with making mainstream religion an ally of science as described by Dawkins is that it legitimizes the idea that non-rational discourse - or faith - is the key to knowledge in the material world. Any implication of that nature should be avoided I suspect he thinks, because he doesn't want religion to take a role in science.

Yes, of course, he is right. However, religion already has a level of legitimacy. That probably isn't going away. No, we aren't going to run around in an alliance with religion and tell them they can make any scientific statements. Not going to happen.

Politics, by its nature, is about compromise. Right now, there are millions, perhaps even a billion secularists, atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, deists in the world. However, even with this large number of people who are proponents of rational thought we are in a weak position.

The nature of the people in these groups is not toward homogeneous cooperative groups. Fractured in many idealogical realms even united we need allies in the fight against unreason.

Without allies, unreason will once again take over the world. The problem is that at present we are so dependent on reason and the by-products of reason, science and technology, that the loss of reason as a commanding force and moving forward for humanity will most likely result in the loss of human life - and I'm not just talking about a few people.

Anything we can do to avoid that error condition should be considered (even if sometimes outright rejected). An alliance with mainstream religion, on the topic of science and technology and the furtherance of the improvement of the human condition - is acceptable compared to total loss to the propaganda of the fundamentalist religionists which wish to deny science fact, limit the increase of science unreasonably and with all their fighting risk the destruction of humanity.

Please not that I'm not saying that science should not be limited. Genetic modification of any species for the improvement of those species is exciting, but unless we have the restraint to test such changes (even changes to humanity) and understand if they present any dangers - we could be playing roulette with humanity's existence.

Focus, control and discipline are necessary in order to ensure the continued future of humanity.

Republicans, in general disbelieve evolution

This was a great blog entry. Although I have to say that the results do not really surprise me.

As the author indicates in a comment of his own - it is odd that most people agree with the science they need on a daily basis and accept it such as physics, computing and biology, but when it conflicts with their political or religious agenda, they find all the reason in the world to disbelieve it.

Many people have litmus tests for their vote. Well in no uncertain terms, I will never vote for a person so ignorant as to dispute evolution, unless that person both rejects medical care (the result of biological research) and physics such as the size of the universe, its age and the speed of light - and also does not use computers (which relies heavily on physical science, the speed of light and other physics principles.

Foolishness. We live in an era in which science is central to our existence. Being anti-science, in most ways that it is expressed - is being anti the future of humanity. It is being anti the present of humanity, because there are few people in the world that get by even a single day without using science, the products of science, or don't depend on sciences capabilities to provide the basics of life.

All in all, I'm not surprised about 68% of Republicans not believing in evolution. I'm surprised it wasn't a higher percentage.

Some interesting science articles today

Some interesting articles in science that have come out today:
DNA/Genetics - figuring out junk DNA - http://tinyurl.com/yt8pns

More evidence for a Mars shoreline? - http://tinyurl.com/2rpwuu

ISS Computers on the Fritz - http://tinyurl.com/3y5knu
I think this is a bit more alarming than they make it out. In my opinion, if they had to abandon station, its orbit would degrade and make it nearly impossible for a new docking. There might also be problems in that since the computer shut down - that it might be hard to re-start remotely.

Baby Monitor Picks up space shuttle video - http://tinyurl.com/2koxv5

I'm not sure what this has to do with Dental plans - but at Dentalplans.com - commentary on activities of two of Saturn's moons - http://tinyurl.com/34dp9s

Now that's really weird, the website just seems to be a collective shop for dental coverage site...

Hope you find the articles of interest.

Honor Killing - a Lifestyle Choice

Honor killings are back in the news with the recent death of Banaz Mahmod Aga in England. Honor killings are a perversion of justice in that they pitch the ones that should protect you as the perpetrators of your destruction. This case, like the case publicized with video in Iraq, involves family members, this time father and uncle - instigating the death of the daughter/niece.

I have visited England on two occasions and have family located in the country. When I was there I found to my consternation at the time that it was far more a liberal place to live than the United States of America. Now, I understand more about the USA I see that many places in Europe are much more liberal on many levels than people in the USA. It seems to me that anyone growing up in England would get a course in understanding about romantic love and the idea that your live is what you make of it - not the choices made for you by other people.

It is an effort by the past to control the future. In typical fashion this is the efforts of the men to control and subjugate women and keep it that way.

Again, the event center around Kurds. It seems they teach as a founding lesson that killing a person is much better than living with them as the person they have grown to be. In this specific case it seems that the father arranged a marriage for the daughter to a man, it turns out was very violent and apparently felt wife-beating is a virtue.

So, she left him, and fell in love with another man. Daddy and uncle felt he was a bad choice (even though this man was also a Kurd of some sort as well) and decided that as a child might destroy a toy that accidently hurt their hand, they would lash out at the daughter/niece and kill her horribly.

The fact that they were able to find five young men who apparently felt this was OK and killing her by choking her to death with shoe strings and then damaging her body and throwing it in to a suitcase which they then buried in someone else's garden - is despicable as well.

What exactly happened?

"Oh, by the way, my daughter is seeing a man that I don't like, can you please kill her horribly as a lesson to all women that they should not defy the men?"

"Duh-huh, yeah boss, that sounds like a great thing to do. I think I'll even get some of my buddies to help, since I'm not man enough to be able to take a woman out by myself."

"OK, good job, the priests will remember you well for your purification efforts."

Here are apparently a list of other women, killed for who they love, killed for doing their jobs, killed for having jobs. What exactly are humans? It is to be hoped that I am not the same species as these people.

So, as we rapidly approach father's day - we should all ponder that not all father's should be rewarded for the things they are willing to do to their daughters.

Apple The Software Company Introduces Safari Browser

Now, now, just from the tiel, perhaps I will get razzed by Apple fans. Not to worry, this is intentional. Long before the iMac and the recent resurgence of Apple IT people have recognized that Apple is a software company.

You might state that there isn't a single Apple OS running on non-Apple hardware and you would only be partially correct.

Other companies make the hardware. Apple certainly helps with standards and requirements; however, it isn't Apple that makes these things.

Apple is known for - its operating system. Apple is known for - iTunes. Apple is known for - the user interface for the iPOD. They worked hard, no doubt on the design of the iPOD, but they don't build them.

So, the conclusion of Apple as a software company is almost complete with the release of the internet browser Safari.

Now, let me back up and say a few things:
1) I encouraged and bought my wife's MacBook when she was pregnant with our second child. So far she loves everything about it except the absence of quality games.

2) When my father-in-law was at the end of his latest porrly engineered PC, with our experiences with Apple computers, we got him the Mac Mini. It suits his purposes and even though he is older (78 years old or so) he found the transition not such a big deal.

3) I encourages and my wife bought an iPOD recently, even though she already had a competing MP3 player. Mostly so we can get the connector and control the iPOD directly from my wife's new minivan.

As soon as I heard about it, I downloaded and run sometimes the Safari browser on my Windows XP PC.

There are many great things about Apple as a software company. They are the only ones who have a chance at bringing a varient of Linux/Unix in as a popular operating system. They do good work that appears to not require as much patching as competing Microsoft products. This might in part be due to their control of the hardware side of the equation. The proliferation of even different motherboards can be cause for problems with Microsoft Windows operating systems.

However, ultimately, Apple fails as a software company in the one place where Microsoft shines as a software company - in the Development Environment. I'm an application developer and I've been writing programs for about 10 years. The Microsoft IDE, Visual Studio 2005, is a polished interface that makes writing a multitude of different programs easy and allows a proliferation of third-party software on the Windows PC.

My experience with the Apple development environment, was that it is at least 5 years (or more) behind the Visual Studio IDE. If Apple wants to sell more Apple operating system computers, they need to generate more third party software. A poor development environment just isn't going to do it.

The other major stumbling block to Apple OS computers and Apple's software failure, is the lack of VPN software. I'd love to change over to a Mac of some sort, but it simply isn't possible when the best Developer IDE exists on Windows OS and there simply isn't a way to do my work on an Apple machine.

If they want to boost their sales, Apple would invite Cisco over to create VPN software that works on the Apple OS.

Politics of the Presidential Candidacy: Democrats

I'll start this blog entry with a brief disclaimer. I am technically not a democrat; although when I first registered as a voter ages ago I may have put down democrat. Really, I have no idea how they think when you register to vote at age 18 that you have any idea if you are going to be a Republican or a Democrat. Even if you do have a good idea, how do you know that is what you'll be for the rest of your life?

I tend to vote democrat for only one good reason. The Republicans are closely bound to religion and the Democrats are not. This isn't to say that this years presidential candidate run hasn't been filled with Democrats blabbing about how god changed their lives, does their dishes or otherwise is a great guy. No, what it simply means is that I, as an atheist, my wife as an agnostic (she's an atheist, but I think she avoids the term for the derogatory associations people apply to it) and my children are to be raised at the very least with an open mind about the topic and certainly explicitly told of the horrible things that religion is capable of doing as well as the things that are immoral and presented as god's doing in the bible - are not directly threatened with illegality by the Democratic party.

Republican presidents are littered with comments that appeal to the religious majority and in reality are very threatening to those of us that are not 'godly' or 'religious' - whatever those terms really mean.

I'd wrap up the disclaimer that I think that there have been two evangelical presidents that have server the USA: President Carter and the current President Bush. Of the two, I don't remember President Carter as being the worst possible president that the USA has possibly earned. The other point is that stem cell research has a direct impact on the future of my self and my children. I want to live as long as possible in as healthy a state as possible, and I hope for the same for my children and any grandchildren or onward that I might actually survive to see or live beyond my life. It is pretty clear that it isn't just Bush that is against stem cell research. There are limits to the power one man has, and I'm pretty sure Bush, in his present state cannot do anything on his own.

So, finally, to the subject.

It appears based on recent articles that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are the front runners for the Democrats. If either of them win the candidacy I will vote for them. Why? After 200+ years aren't you tired of the actual and de facto racism that declares that only old, white, protestant, men are qualified to be president of the USA? We have one exception, where JFK was in fact moderately young and Catholic, but I have my doubts in the political atmosphere of the present that a Catholic could run and win at this point in time.

That is what the major problem is with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. In essence the American voters cannot be legislated to do what we do in the arena of regular employment - to be equal opportunity electors.

In the end, you might consider ideas that there should be as many congressmen in the house and senate to match or closely match the percentage of the black people in the US. I'm not talking about quotas, I'm just talking that if people vote with the color of their skin even part of the time, then there should be more black people involved in politics.

The same condition is true for women. Women, in general, instead of capitalizing on the capacity to vote, appear to faithfully vote the way their husbands vote. So, instead of a congress of a relatively healthy mix of males and females, we have a congress that is dominated by men. There are a few women, of course, but a few women isn't close to a healthy representation of women by percentage of population.

Barack Obama fields even more difficult problems. He is perceived as too 'white' for black people to want to vote for and the conservative members of our society would probably never vote for someone who is even a little black.

I think it is important, just as a general measure that finally, we catch up to those British folks that we like to look down our noses. Margaret Thatcher is now a part of their history and lead their country for many years. Meanwhile, we the 'better' people than them - are decades behind them. E-mails flutter across the web about how horrible Hillary Clinton is - and the sexism in them is either ignored by the people nodding their heads or just acknowledged.

There are many liberal minded people out there, that I suspect want to have a government of the people, by the people, but there are also many conservative elements in our population that are controlled by that same ideal - just not those people - black or female, by the people means to them - the same old WASPs that have been running the show for two centuries. The same ones that allowed slavery and condoned the idea that women were second class citizens.

I wouldn't vote for just any woman as there are certainly self-hating women out there that paradoxically pursue political office in order to ensure that women in general don't have power but women in specific (meaning themselves) do have power.

The 2008 election will be a defining moment for the US if either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama are on the democratic ticket.

Hell, maybe if they can get elected, an atheist might have hope of being elected as president.

Not likely, though. Not likely at all. I might have great hopes for my children, but if they grow up like me, their mother, their grandfather or grandmother on my side of the family (both agnostics at best - although oddly very conservative folks) - they won't be electable as president of the USA.

How the Nintendo Wii Will Win in the Long Term

There have been a multitude of articles (such that I won't link them here) about how the Nintendo Wii will not win in the long run. That, it has yesterday's technology today and three years from now it won't be able to compete with "future-proofed" hardware such as the XBox 360 and Sony Playstation 3.

This kind of argument is ridiculous at best. It presents an idea - that Nintendo, having created the Wii, will do nothing with technology for the next three years (or whatever years on in to the future) and that Nintendo will cower asking for mercy from Sony and Microsoft.

Nintendo has already shown the possible path for the Wii in the way it has worked with the Nintendo DS (yet another system supposedly to be extinguished by a Sony product).

There was the original version which I didn't really take much notice of myself. Then there was the DS lite, which didn't really take my interest until I saw commercials for Big Brain Academy. Then, it completely had my interest.

So, I purchased one - the white one. I played the crap out of it. The New Super Mario Brothers - a game that I'd only seen other people play when I was a kid - I finally had for myself. Big Brain Academy - I beat the crap out of it. Eventually, we got one for my son and my wife and we have a bunch of games - the good, the bad and the ugly. Some, like EBA (Elite Beat Agents) were so surprisingly good that it was an incredible experience to play the game.

So, you find that the Nintendo DS, can play Nintendo Gameboy Advance games. Oohhh, look an upgrade path - that works (Sony could learn from this, apparently).

What is next for the Nintendo DS? Who knows? But I can say this, most likely it will have a touch screen, be compatible with all Nintendo DS games and be better (maybe larger screen) and faster than the current models. Maybe, it would be a Nintendo DS Advance model?

But you can see the progression, correct? You can see how, in a few months, perhaps there will be different colored Nintendo Wii's out there. It probably won't encourage any existing customers to buy a second one, but it would delivery some more sales to the system. Then, maybe two years from now as the system does genuinely age - you'll see Wii v2. It would be able to play all the games that the Nintendo Wii can play - and would have newer graphics and its own games. This would encourage new sales from existing customers as well as new sales from people who may not have purchased the original Nintendo Wii - perhaps they were saving for the XBox 360 or the PS3.

You can easily envision a portable Wii model, no? Take thw Wii, two years of computational increases and put it in an even smaller box with an integrated screen that you can carry with you. You could almost do it now with the current Nintendo Wii. Make it battery powerable and presto - people can take and play Wii games together with networked Wiis.

The very idea that Nintendo, as experienced as they are - will sit on the Wii as it is and leave it that way for 3 or 5 years is silly. They have a base system now, one that can be duplicated and emulated in future systems that will add more capabilities. I can foresee a time, two years from now or three years from now - where there is a Nintendo Wii that has similar graphical capabilities as the PS3 or XBox 360 - costs $250 and of course, has the Wii control architecture.

The biggest problem I see out there - is that Microsoft and Sony will wake up and get their own motion sensing architecture, be able to reverse engineer it in to their current architecture and come out with compelling games - for everyone, not just the gamer population.

Targeting Demographics in Comics and Games - Fruits Basket

As indicated in this article some types of entertainment are now beginning to target women effectively as opposed to targeting hardcore gamers (mostly men or boys) or hardcore comic book readers (again mostly men or boys).

It is interesting that a society like Japan, where from articles about rapes, treatment of women and equality issues - you see the source of not one but two major pushes toward empowering women. Perhaps Japan isn't as bad as the press would have you believe, or Japan is getting better in this regard (one can only hope for all countries to get better in this regard) or Japan's businesses are getting over targeting the young male because frankly, they want to make more money.

Hey, I'm all for making more money if hand in hand comes the increasing of the equality and perception of peoples.

A good case in point is the anime and manga series Fruits Basket. Perhaps this isn't the normal kind of manga/anime that people concentrate on. There is little fighting that isn't verbal and no spouting necks with their dearly and recently departed heads.

No, it isn't one of those. It also isn't what I would call a traditional female oriented manga (a shojo manga). The reason I say this is because if you watch the events in the show and step back a bit and review it you can see that the show is about horror of a more classic kind. It isn't about the shock horror - 'boo' ah haha made you jump kind of horror. You watch the show and you see that Tohru Honda appears to be just any other girl, but her past is all about loss (and one might reflect that all our lives are about loss at least in part). She lost her father when she was very young. Her mother died fairly recently when she was in high school and other than her grandfather - there is no one for her to turn. In fact, even her grandfather, while a nice character has his limitations. He has other responsibilities with his other grandchildren.

In her, you find the main character - a person that could be devastated and find no real reason to live - and turns out to be a flowering source of strength for everyone around her. People who on the surface appear to be very strong end up exposing their weaknesses to her and it is shown that in turn - she is stronger than them and lends her strength to them to make them stronger.

This is no female formed character playing the role as a male hero with buff body and mostly male characteristics. While this does show a certain strength that it would be nice for women to take up, it appears to be devoid of female or feminine qualities. So, paradoxically, Tohru (which is typically a male name in Japan) contains many characteristics that are typical subservient female - she rises in strength (at least at the point in the manga that I'm reading) to where you can envision her standing up to the head of her friends family and saying that what is happening is wrong, but she likes doing dishes, cleaning and cooking.

I can't say I'm entirely happy with her character. I'd love if she was more outward in other ways - a leader in school, perhaps a promising career as well as being mentally strong. But I'll take pieces of what are really good - and the fact that it is written by a woman as good signs. I hope the writer - Natsuki Takaya enjoys a lot of success and continues to write many manga and that they get promoted to anime as well.

Perhaps, someday she'll write a very strong female character. One to make Tohru proud and yet still be feminine without being subservient.

One final word on Fruits Basket - our example of an industry appealing to the female instead of just the young males - it is with utter disappointment that the anime series ended so abruptly. There is a long road ahead for the series which has not even been completed in manga - that it would have been a joy to see translated in to the anime. Sadly, the way they ended the Fruits Basket anime, it is unlikely to ever become a reality.

My Experience at Charlotte-Douglas Airport

My first impression of the airport (although I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time I've been there, it is the first time I remember well) is incredibly long lines. As I arrived from Newark I had to fight the lines for security in order to get to the car rental area.

On my return trip I had another impression. My return flight was at 10:00PM, so I didn't have to deal so much with long lines at security (fortunately). No, I had to deal with avoiding being hit by electric carts.

They seemed to be everywhere. Sure enough, there were people in various levels of distress riding on them. Mostly, they were rather large people. I'm technically obese, I think, at 192 pounds and 5' 9". The people riding the carts put me to shame. There were old people as well, probably more old people than obese people riding the carts.

The airport appears to be relatively updated, but there was no provision for the alrge number of electric carts (which are almost car sized) driving around all over the place.

There also seems to be no checklist for the functionality of the carts, as several of them lacked running lights or working beep signals that they were running. I was almost hit by one, partially my fault because I walk around with half of my head thinking about other things. After that, I paid more attention to the carts and my discover that they were everywhere.

After I finished eating my dinner, I found that there were a huge number of the carts parked or taking on passengers in the concourse. Really, I had to say there were probably about 9 of them in the area at one time.

Charlotte-Douglas airport needs a serious update. Either a floor above or below the regular walking area where the people who can't get around well on their own can get around the airport. I saw other people almost get hit by these crazed cab-driver-like cart drivers. There are no rules or lines for these carts to follow and for some reason, I don't know why, but there are more of them in use at Charlotte-Douglas airport than I've seen at any other airport.

The implications, as our US population increases and the number of disabled people through age or obesity increase on building structures for everyone should be immediately obvious. We need either separate access for the disabled or controlled access for everyone. The last thing I think anyone wants to see is someone become disabled because they were hit by a cart to move the disabled people to an airport gate.

A Teacher Railroaded in to Prison by Lack of Technical Knolwedge

A recent article spoke about a teacher that was released from prison for exposing 7th graders to porn.

Apparently, the scenario was this:
Substitute Teacher is giving class with a computer.
Porn Shows up on the Screen.
Substitute teacher convicted with wrong evidence presented by prosecution to sever decades of prison time.

Now, the first point I want to address is basic law. Means, Opportunity and Motive. Did the teacher have the means to put porn on the computer to show the children, sure and so did just about anybody in the school. Did the teacher have the opportunity, sure and so did just about anybody in the school. Did the teacher have the motive to show porn to the 7th graders? Well, unless the prosecution proved that she was some sick in the head woman that intended to show porn to the children in some beginning overture to having sex with them, I find this pretty unlikely.

So, I find that whatever jury convicted the woman of these criminal actions, they must not have been told that all three factors needed to be proven, or glossed over it completely.

It seems that it would be unlikely that they should convict based on the information in the article.

Now, on to my second point. What exactly is so horrible about sex? What exactly makes it a "felony risk or injury to a minor"? Where these children endangered by the images? Is there some direct link to seeing a few images of porn and growing up to be criminal sexual deviants?

So, it is questionable if there was in fact a crime. If you are going to put someone in prison for "felony risk or injury to a minor" you have to prove that there was damage. Pornography, in and of itself does not pose a direct risk of anything to a minor. It certainly does not perform any damage.

The third and final point is that the courts, judges, lawyers seem to have little knowledge about computers of their own. They depended on an 'expert' to tell them that the woman had done it on purpose. Relying on one expert is a little problematic. But how is it, that no one as a person had not run in to something like this in a personal capacity? Had none of them ever had computers and used them and run in to problems with pop-ups, trojans or viruses?

So, the computer is examined after her conviction and discovered to be 1) Windows 98 and 2) had software on it that would have caused the pornagraphic images to be shown to the class.

#2, is in inference given the articles content and the contradiction of the state's witness saying that she had to have done it on purpose. The state's witness was a police officer with which we are given no information as to his training or how he made the determination that the woman showed the pornography to the children on purpose.

So, who is really guilty, if in fact damage was done to minors? Well, look, you can't be running windows 98 SE as your OS, here in 2007. The software is far out of date and as mentioned in the article, weak on security. Perhaps the IT person at the school should be charged with negligence? Or perhaps the people who pay the taxes for the school should be charged, for not paying enough taxes to buy computers on a regular schedule and protect them from things liket his? Or maybe the school board for not making the decision to have up-to-date and protected computers?

Or maybe they should attempt to find the person who wrote the malware affecting the computer and go after that person? Or perhaps they should go after the websites whose contents were shown?

Maybe they should go after the internet itself??? Who knows where it could stop?

So, they aren't going to re-try this woman for what happened - which was pretty clearly at this point an accident. What would have happened to this woman if the computer had been wiped or the hard drive in its aging case crashed since her conviction?

They were going to put her away for 40 years for this? This batch of stupidity and accident?

I think a few people need a reality check. The basic premise of the case needs to be re-assessed. Prove needs to be given that subjecting 7th graders to pornography once will damage them in some way for life.

The rise of Islam

I don't typically go to Al-Jazeera's website. I don't speak or read Arabic, but they do produce English articles and some are good, like this one.

The heart of this article blames the decline of socialism and secular governments on their being defeated by Israel in a particularly humiliating manner - that manner was quick and assertive.

So, then apparently, men in these countries became disillusioned with socialism and turned to Islam to restore their honor.

Even the article notes with particular daring that after 40 years of turning to Islam, they are still getting their asses handed to them.

Clearly, the style of government or its religiosity has little to do with being a 'power' and showing military might.

More disturbing about this article is really three points. 1) They blame Israel for the rise of Islam and 2) They think as long as Israel holds lands it seized there will be no peace and 3) their ego is what is important, more important than peace.

There are certainly conflicting ideas in this article. It seems almost nostalgic for the socialist secular governments that are under attack by the religionists. Then it turns and goes after Israel for being what it is - a country. Those countries that attacked Israel, Jordan, Syria and Egypt, did they really attack (or defend) that land because of secular reasons - for the good of those countries as secular entities? No, of course not. They participated because with their three countries to Israel's one - they were going to make those Jews pay for taking land. Because, you know, land is more important than people.

What, did they have some logic that Israel was going to keep taking land until they conquered Egypt? Clearly, after getting their asses handed to them, if Israel really desired to take them over - they could have disabled those governments, so prevention of being ruled by religious people other than your own religion isn't the justification.

So, what, is Islam threatened by the Jews? Are they, with their 2% of the world's population (or less) going to kill or subjugate over 1 billion Islamic people? No. They just live in an area of holy land.

Going back to the article - it seemed that the context would mean - that all because they have bruised male egos - they needed to turn to Islam and try and kill people - and continue to do so because of this babyish idea that they need to save face. Screw it. The land, isn't so important. Children, family and the future are important. What land they live on - isn't particularly important.

Well, if god wants to protect his holy land, he better show his power and do it his damned self. Those people, the Palestinians - that were pushed off their lands - look, it sucks. It wasn't a really nice thing for the Israelis to do. Yes, perhaps a little reparations would be due. But for now, I think we can all believe one thing sincerely. Go find someplace else to live and thrive. Come back when you have made yourselves financially powerful enough to give monetary inducements to the Israeli government to give up its lands.

Just staying there to be subjugated is dumb. Just staying there to raise young children to become men and suicide bombers does nothing for your future, but end it. There is so much Earth and even with 6.5 billion people, there are still plenty of places to live.

To stay there in Israel or near Israel, to stay in the refugee camps in the neighboring countries has no future. You cannot get an education in these places. You cannot plan a future in these places. You cannot earn millions of dollars in business under the conditions your people are under at present.

The best thing to do, is to find a new home or homes. To raise new generations out of the shadow of war. To earn money and cherish life over land. Then, if those later generations think its all so important to go back to Israel and get back your native lands - you go for it. With cash in hand, peaceful plans on sharing the land and cooperation.

US as Police of the World

Over time the USA has come to represent itself as the police of the world. We were there to police Vietnam and prevent the spread of communism in a domino effect to our doorstep. We have done many things including encourage dictators who torture and kill people just to keep allies in power.

In the end though, what do you expect of the police and when are you most disappointed in the police?

We expect the police to obey the law. We are most disappointed in the police when they break the law.

The USA cannot even have the appearance of breaking the law if it wants to be an effective fighter for justice. In this article it is discussed that a subdivision of a major company in the US is being brought up on charges for aiding in the transport of prisoners to places where there aren't any defenses to these prisoners rights.

I was a member of the US military for 10 years. I have to say that the idea of torturing military members for gain is not only unethical, but is illegal by treaties and laws which bind the US. The Geneva Convention covers military ethics and torture.

So, how is it that civilians are being kidnapped and whisked away to areas where who knows what is being done to them? Who knows? There is a significant problem with this setup in that it does not allow for oversight.

In the TV series 24 unethical actions are performed in cases of severe threat to a large population. Since it is a TV series, these things are well-defined. Nuclear weapon going off in the US territory and things like that.

But who determines what is a severe threat to a large population? What in fact consists of such a threat? Is there a commission that determines that the information x, y and z equals nuclear threat and unethical action should be taken to determine who is doing it, when it is going to happen and stop it from happening? Or is it some men in a closed room, talking to each other, afraid that another 9/11 might happen and going after everyone with the possibility of causing such an event?

Our society in the USA and our technological achievements are indicative of the openness of our society, not the decisions that are handled behind closed doors. McCarthyism is what happens when we enter closed sessions to discuss and jail people. It is the primary direction we are headed in at present.

But if we can't be a moral example to everyone - especially those groups that we go over to police, we simply don't have any authority or respect and no reason these people should follow us.