This gentleman has played the "Bioshock" demo (which I haven't had time to play), and came away confused as to whether the game's developer, Irrational Games, is for or against Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. From everything I've read, I'm uncertain myself.
Even the company's name says nothing, because an Objectivist might come up with such a name just for some irony. I suppose we'll have to wait until the game is released, but I fear that even then we might not know. Not unless the developer tells us, of course.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
"Punative Psychiatry" Returning to Russia?
The Soviets had a tendency to put dissidents into asylums (along with the gulags and wherever else, including the dirt), which I can only imagine was an unpleasant experience. That practice was supposed to have died along with the Soviet Union, but this story suggests that it might be returning.
Some quotes:
But the treatment of one critic of the Putin Government has raised fears among Russia's human rights community that the Kremlin is preparing to incarcerate a new generation of dissidents in asylums.
Naked and with her hands and feet bound to the corners of a metal bed, Larisa Arap eyed with quiet defiance the doctors who wanted to declare her mad.
It was a futile gesture. The men in white coats standing over her were bitter adversaries. Enraged by the allegations that she had levelled against them, they also knew that, as an open Kremlin critic, the state would do little to help her.
And it's apparently not just a change in practices, but rathe a change in Russian law that makes it possible:
Mrs Arap's allegations come as no surprise to those who have followed psychiatry in Russia in recent years. In 2001, the law was quietly changed to remove the rights of sectioned patients to seek an independent assessment. And dozens of incidents suggest Russia's psychiatric system is rapidly becoming as unsavoury as it was in Soviet times.
Andrei Fedorovich, for example, was held in a clinic for 43 days last northern autumn after his neighbours, who had powerful connections in the Moscow police force, reported him as being mad, in an attempt to seize his apartment.
Alexei Shuralyov tells a similar story — although this time his antagonists came from the FSB, the feared domestic spy agency that employed his wife. Such stories are common.
Read the whole thing.
Some quotes:
But the treatment of one critic of the Putin Government has raised fears among Russia's human rights community that the Kremlin is preparing to incarcerate a new generation of dissidents in asylums.
Naked and with her hands and feet bound to the corners of a metal bed, Larisa Arap eyed with quiet defiance the doctors who wanted to declare her mad.
It was a futile gesture. The men in white coats standing over her were bitter adversaries. Enraged by the allegations that she had levelled against them, they also knew that, as an open Kremlin critic, the state would do little to help her.
And it's apparently not just a change in practices, but rathe a change in Russian law that makes it possible:
Mrs Arap's allegations come as no surprise to those who have followed psychiatry in Russia in recent years. In 2001, the law was quietly changed to remove the rights of sectioned patients to seek an independent assessment. And dozens of incidents suggest Russia's psychiatric system is rapidly becoming as unsavoury as it was in Soviet times.
Andrei Fedorovich, for example, was held in a clinic for 43 days last northern autumn after his neighbours, who had powerful connections in the Moscow police force, reported him as being mad, in an attempt to seize his apartment.
Alexei Shuralyov tells a similar story — although this time his antagonists came from the FSB, the feared domestic spy agency that employed his wife. Such stories are common.
Read the whole thing.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Cox and Forkum on the Clinton as Presidential Candidate
Cox and Forkum handle the Dem's concerns that Hillary Clinton as Presidential Candidate would have a negative impact at the bottom of the party. They usually have some good quotes and commentary, but I usually just go there for the illustration.
To quote, though, a little tidbit:
A strategist with close ties to leaders in Congress said Democratic Senate candidates in competitive races would be strongly urged to distance themselves from Clinton.
"The argument with Hillary right now in some of these red states is she's so damn unpopular," said Andy Arnold, chairman of the Greenville, S.C., Democratic Party. "I think Hillary is someone who could drive folks on the other side out to vote who otherwise wouldn't."
Golly, but politics sure are fun.
To quote, though, a little tidbit:
A strategist with close ties to leaders in Congress said Democratic Senate candidates in competitive races would be strongly urged to distance themselves from Clinton.
"The argument with Hillary right now in some of these red states is she's so damn unpopular," said Andy Arnold, chairman of the Greenville, S.C., Democratic Party. "I think Hillary is someone who could drive folks on the other side out to vote who otherwise wouldn't."
Golly, but politics sure are fun.
Boing Boing Doesn't Understand Why 9/11 Was Important
I simply can't stand the revisionist history surround the Iraqi war. Beforehand, everyone believed that he had WMD's, he'd broken the cease-fire that ended the first Gulf War on multiple occasions, and he was know for giving money to the family of suicide bombers. That's a little venting.
This Boing Boing story, though, seems to demonstrate their absolute ignorance of the significance of 9/11. Everything really did change that day. The first WTC bombing was just a harbinger of what was to come (and about with Clinton did absolutely nothing), the USS Cole, the African Embassy bombings, etc., etc., were all bad enough.
But 9/11 changed the rules. It showed that we're no longer just batting at flies, that these Islamic fundamentalists can and will do some real damage if given half the chance. And so, of course, 9/11 should have changed everyone's opinion on what war might be worth fighting.
Just because Bush chose to focus on all the wrong reasons for removing Hussein from power, doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do. Even if he wasn't an immediate threat, he was a future one.
This Boing Boing story, though, seems to demonstrate their absolute ignorance of the significance of 9/11. Everything really did change that day. The first WTC bombing was just a harbinger of what was to come (and about with Clinton did absolutely nothing), the USS Cole, the African Embassy bombings, etc., etc., were all bad enough.
But 9/11 changed the rules. It showed that we're no longer just batting at flies, that these Islamic fundamentalists can and will do some real damage if given half the chance. And so, of course, 9/11 should have changed everyone's opinion on what war might be worth fighting.
Just because Bush chose to focus on all the wrong reasons for removing Hussein from power, doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do. Even if he wasn't an immediate threat, he was a future one.
According to Study, the Mainstream Media's Losing It
This story at Ars Technica confirms what I've always believed about the mainstream media (MSM): it's biased, unprofessional, uninformed, anti-American, and no longer serves its mission as protector of America's Constitutional Republic. At least, as a recent Pew study shows, most Americans would agree with me.
Some interesting items:
This, however, doesn't mean that the public isn't keeping up with drinking a tall glass of press "hatorade." Pew notes that, since 1985, the public generally sees the mainstream press as doing an increasingly bad job at remaining moral, protecting democracy, and avoiding bias. Only 39 percent of Americans surveyed felt that the media managed to get the facts straight, compared to 46 percent in 2001 and 55 percent in 1985. "As a consequence, the believability ratings for individual news organizations are lower today than they were in the 1980s and 1990s," writes the report. Americans also feel that the press is less professional than it was in 1985, with 66 percent of survey respondents describing the press as professional compared to 72 percent (although there was a particularly low dip to 49 percent in July of 2002).
The Internet crowd feels even more strongly:
The Internet news audience is even more critical of news organizations as a whole. "The internet news audience is particularly likely to criticize news organizations for their lack of empathy, their failure to 'stand up for America,' and political bias," reads the report. "Roughly two-thirds (68%) of those who get most of their news from the internet say that news organizations do not care about the people they report on, and 53% believe that news organizations are too critical of America." Comparatively, only 53 percent of the general public believes that news organizations don't care about the people they report on, and 43 percent believes that they're too critical of America.
And then, of course, there's the partisan line:
But there's another set of data lurking below the surface that is taking its toll on these numbers. It's no secret that Republicans and Democrats feel differently—and, in some cases, very strongly—over exactly how biased and accurate the mainstream media is, and Pew's data reflects this. For example, almost three times as many Republicans (63 percent) say that the press is too critical of America compared to Democrats (23 percent), "and there is virtually no measure of press values or performance on which there is not a substantial gap in the views of partisans," Pew found.
This is an important study. I wonder how well the MSM will cover the Pew results.
Some interesting items:
This, however, doesn't mean that the public isn't keeping up with drinking a tall glass of press "hatorade." Pew notes that, since 1985, the public generally sees the mainstream press as doing an increasingly bad job at remaining moral, protecting democracy, and avoiding bias. Only 39 percent of Americans surveyed felt that the media managed to get the facts straight, compared to 46 percent in 2001 and 55 percent in 1985. "As a consequence, the believability ratings for individual news organizations are lower today than they were in the 1980s and 1990s," writes the report. Americans also feel that the press is less professional than it was in 1985, with 66 percent of survey respondents describing the press as professional compared to 72 percent (although there was a particularly low dip to 49 percent in July of 2002).
The Internet crowd feels even more strongly:
The Internet news audience is even more critical of news organizations as a whole. "The internet news audience is particularly likely to criticize news organizations for their lack of empathy, their failure to 'stand up for America,' and political bias," reads the report. "Roughly two-thirds (68%) of those who get most of their news from the internet say that news organizations do not care about the people they report on, and 53% believe that news organizations are too critical of America." Comparatively, only 53 percent of the general public believes that news organizations don't care about the people they report on, and 43 percent believes that they're too critical of America.
And then, of course, there's the partisan line:
But there's another set of data lurking below the surface that is taking its toll on these numbers. It's no secret that Republicans and Democrats feel differently—and, in some cases, very strongly—over exactly how biased and accurate the mainstream media is, and Pew's data reflects this. For example, almost three times as many Republicans (63 percent) say that the press is too critical of America compared to Democrats (23 percent), "and there is virtually no measure of press values or performance on which there is not a substantial gap in the views of partisans," Pew found.
This is an important study. I wonder how well the MSM will cover the Pew results.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 4462 Diggs, is a predictable celebration over Karl Rove's resignation. The vitriol present in the comments is something to behold.
More on Russian Politics
This summary of the Russian political situation posted on the Free Republic is pessimistic but, I believe, too close to the truth. Putin is already a shoe-in for the 2012 election, and there's some certainty that whomever is "elected" in between will be merely a temporary fill-in.
Put another way:
Back in early June on WAMU's Diane Rehm talk show, Andrei Sitov, the Washington-based representative for Russia's government-owned and controlled ITAR-TASS news service (and himself a government spokesman pretending to be a correspondent), portrayed the Russian election as analogous to the U.S. race. "There are two frontrunners now," he stated, "the two First Deputy Prime Ministers [Sergei Ivanov and Dmitri Medvedev]. An intriguing possibility is that [Putin] will say 'I endorse both--you choose'--the Russian people choose." Sitov went on to explain how these two would be promoting themselves to the Russian electorate just as American presidential candidates would do after the two parties have completed their nomination process.
At which point the U.S. commentators cried foul, explaining that Medvedev, a St. Petersburg lawyer and former head of Putin's administration, and Ivanov, the former defense minister and an old KGB crony of Putin's, are members of the same ruling cabal that has been progressively tightening its grip on Russia.
A comparable situation in America, clarified Stanford's Michael McFaul, would be "if George W. Bush decided that Karl Rove and Condoleezza Rice would be the two candidates and all opposition Democratic candidates would not be allowed to run. Second, all of the television stations from which Russians get their political news are either owned or controlled by the state. These are the reforms that Putin has instituted as president of Russia."
And what do we have to look forward to?
Even worse, the new man will be trying to show that, like Putin, he can rule with an iron fist. This means belligerence and a search for scapegoats bordering on the irrational will be the order of the day. For a taste of things to come, ponder the anti-U.S. tirade from TASS's Sitov towards the end of the WAMU broadcast. It would have done the Russian ultranationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky proud: "The Putin course will continue," Sitov declared. "He is saying this to the future U.S. president's administration. You need to know that the good old days when you could lie to Russia and steal from Russia, when you could trample on Russia--all those days are over."
It's a quick read, and worth it.
Put another way:
Back in early June on WAMU's Diane Rehm talk show, Andrei Sitov, the Washington-based representative for Russia's government-owned and controlled ITAR-TASS news service (and himself a government spokesman pretending to be a correspondent), portrayed the Russian election as analogous to the U.S. race. "There are two frontrunners now," he stated, "the two First Deputy Prime Ministers [Sergei Ivanov and Dmitri Medvedev]. An intriguing possibility is that [Putin] will say 'I endorse both--you choose'--the Russian people choose." Sitov went on to explain how these two would be promoting themselves to the Russian electorate just as American presidential candidates would do after the two parties have completed their nomination process.
At which point the U.S. commentators cried foul, explaining that Medvedev, a St. Petersburg lawyer and former head of Putin's administration, and Ivanov, the former defense minister and an old KGB crony of Putin's, are members of the same ruling cabal that has been progressively tightening its grip on Russia.
A comparable situation in America, clarified Stanford's Michael McFaul, would be "if George W. Bush decided that Karl Rove and Condoleezza Rice would be the two candidates and all opposition Democratic candidates would not be allowed to run. Second, all of the television stations from which Russians get their political news are either owned or controlled by the state. These are the reforms that Putin has instituted as president of Russia."
And what do we have to look forward to?
Even worse, the new man will be trying to show that, like Putin, he can rule with an iron fist. This means belligerence and a search for scapegoats bordering on the irrational will be the order of the day. For a taste of things to come, ponder the anti-U.S. tirade from TASS's Sitov towards the end of the WAMU broadcast. It would have done the Russian ultranationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky proud: "The Putin course will continue," Sitov declared. "He is saying this to the future U.S. president's administration. You need to know that the good old days when you could lie to Russia and steal from Russia, when you could trample on Russia--all those days are over."
It's a quick read, and worth it.
Putin Continues Harsh Rhetoric
Putin continues to turn up the heat. He just doesn't like the West infringing on former Soviet states. This story in the Financial Times basically summarizes what's been going on now for some time.
Relevant quotes:
Washington insists the anti-missile system is to deal with “rogue” states, but Mr Putin has said the installations would risk turning Europe into “a powder keg” and has threatened to retarget Russian missiles on Europe if the US goes ahead with the plan, opening the most serious rift in Moscow’s relations with Washington since the cold war.
Regarding moves back towards a command economy:
Mr Putin said fulfilment of plans to double Russia’s annual production of military aircraft by 2025 would require a radical shake-up of domestic aircraft engine manufacturing capacity. “The competitiveness of aircraft engines produced in our country today is, unfortunately, low, extremely low.”
The government plans to consolidate aircraft engine manufacturing companies into a large, state-controlled holding similar to Oboronprom, the helicopter monopoly, and Rosoboron export, the state arms export company.
And Putin sounds a little like Iranian President Imajihadi (or whatever his name is) when it comes to announcing weapons that can't be defeated:
The Navy also announced that Russia was ready to launch serial production of its new Bulava submarine launched intercontinental nuclear missile which Putin has said can penetrate any defence system.
However, military experts said testing of the Bulava was incomplete and that the Navy chief was sabre rattling.
Read the whole thing.
Relevant quotes:
Washington insists the anti-missile system is to deal with “rogue” states, but Mr Putin has said the installations would risk turning Europe into “a powder keg” and has threatened to retarget Russian missiles on Europe if the US goes ahead with the plan, opening the most serious rift in Moscow’s relations with Washington since the cold war.
Regarding moves back towards a command economy:
Mr Putin said fulfilment of plans to double Russia’s annual production of military aircraft by 2025 would require a radical shake-up of domestic aircraft engine manufacturing capacity. “The competitiveness of aircraft engines produced in our country today is, unfortunately, low, extremely low.”
The government plans to consolidate aircraft engine manufacturing companies into a large, state-controlled holding similar to Oboronprom, the helicopter monopoly, and Rosoboron export, the state arms export company.
And Putin sounds a little like Iranian President Imajihadi (or whatever his name is) when it comes to announcing weapons that can't be defeated:
The Navy also announced that Russia was ready to launch serial production of its new Bulava submarine launched intercontinental nuclear missile which Putin has said can penetrate any defence system.
However, military experts said testing of the Bulava was incomplete and that the Navy chief was sabre rattling.
Read the whole thing.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Boing Boing on US-Built Chinese Surveillance System
I'm sure that Boing Boing is implying something really bad here in the creation of a Chinese human-tracking system by a US-financed company. Although, I'd be hard-pressed to tell whether it was the tracking system they're against, or just the fact that it's being built by a US company?
Now, I would vehemently oppose any such system in the US. And I don't like it when US companies engage in this sort of work. But such systems exist in Europe, and are being expanded there as we speak. And I'm not sure I remember Boing Boing making a big deal out of those. Which, of course, would lead me back to the US-built theory.
Now, I would vehemently oppose any such system in the US. And I don't like it when US companies engage in this sort of work. But such systems exist in Europe, and are being expanded there as we speak. And I'm not sure I remember Boing Boing making a big deal out of those. Which, of course, would lead me back to the US-built theory.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 4518 Digg, is a link to some suspended account that says something about Bill Nye quoted the Bible regarding the Moon reflecting light from the Sun.
Not sure what that's all about, but since the link is down, can't really comment on it.
Not sure what that's all about, but since the link is down, can't really comment on it.
China to Limit Access to Foreign Companies
Bad news for all those foreign companies that want a part of the Chinese market. China's doing everything it can to protect its state-owned enterprises, including creating barriers to entry.
This won't last forever. At some point, China's going to have to realize who their customers are.
This won't last forever. At some point, China's going to have to realize who their customers are.
Putin Youth - Scarier and Scarier
More on the Putin Youth, the Nashi, at the Boston Globe's Web site. The more I read about this phenomenon, the more it continues to remind me of the Hitler Youth. Some quotes:
I thought of that young woman when, shortly afterward, I read alarming reports about a new force in Russian public life: a youth movement called Nashi. The word is typically translated as "Ours," but that doesn't quite capture the nationalist, triumphalist overtones of the Russian name. "Nashi," in Russian idiom, means "Our Guys" or "Our Kind"; it's the "us" in us versus them.
"Them," for Nashi, includes everyone from Americans to former Soviet republics that bristle at Russian diktat to Russians who don't subscribe to Putin's authoritarian vision of "sovereign democracy."
As far as its size, it seems to be growing:
Nashi claims to be over 100,000 strong; according to some reports, it has a core of 10,000 activists ages 17 to 25, with another 200,000 or so who regularly attend its events.
And their methods?
Propaganda is not the only weapon in Nashi's arsenal. The movement offers paramilitary training that prepares members for breaking up opposition rallies (under the guise of combating "fascism") and intimidating those who run afoul of the Putin regime.
...
In April, the group's protests against the Estonian government's decision to relocate a memorial to Soviet soldiers turned violent: Hundreds of Nashi goons besieged the Estonian embassy in Moscow, unmolested by the police as they threw rocks, blocked traffic, and tore down the Estonian flag.
And finally, in a nod to a sort of Russian "Aryan purity":
Perhaps more aptly, some Russian liberals refer to Nashi as "Putinjugend." The movement's brownshirt tactics certain evoke shades of Hitler Youth, as does the emphasis on physical fitness, clean living, and procreation for the Motherland. (At the Nashi summer camp, sex was encouraged as an answer to Russia's demographic crisis, and 40 couples were married.)
Read the whole thing.
I thought of that young woman when, shortly afterward, I read alarming reports about a new force in Russian public life: a youth movement called Nashi. The word is typically translated as "Ours," but that doesn't quite capture the nationalist, triumphalist overtones of the Russian name. "Nashi," in Russian idiom, means "Our Guys" or "Our Kind"; it's the "us" in us versus them.
"Them," for Nashi, includes everyone from Americans to former Soviet republics that bristle at Russian diktat to Russians who don't subscribe to Putin's authoritarian vision of "sovereign democracy."
As far as its size, it seems to be growing:
Nashi claims to be over 100,000 strong; according to some reports, it has a core of 10,000 activists ages 17 to 25, with another 200,000 or so who regularly attend its events.
And their methods?
Propaganda is not the only weapon in Nashi's arsenal. The movement offers paramilitary training that prepares members for breaking up opposition rallies (under the guise of combating "fascism") and intimidating those who run afoul of the Putin regime.
...
In April, the group's protests against the Estonian government's decision to relocate a memorial to Soviet soldiers turned violent: Hundreds of Nashi goons besieged the Estonian embassy in Moscow, unmolested by the police as they threw rocks, blocked traffic, and tore down the Estonian flag.
And finally, in a nod to a sort of Russian "Aryan purity":
Perhaps more aptly, some Russian liberals refer to Nashi as "Putinjugend." The movement's brownshirt tactics certain evoke shades of Hitler Youth, as does the emphasis on physical fitness, clean living, and procreation for the Motherland. (At the Nashi summer camp, sex was encouraged as an answer to Russia's demographic crisis, and 40 couples were married.)
Read the whole thing.
Ayn Rand Supported Israel - You Should Too
Just for the record, Ayn Rand supported Israel. As Yaron Brook said in a story in the International Jerusalem Post:
“We view what happens in Israel as an indicator of what will happen in the rest of the world. To the extent America abandons Israel, it abandons itself Israel is a beacon of civilization in a barbaric, backward area,” Brook said on a recent trip here to visit family with his wife, also an Israeli expatriate, and their two children.
“Israel represents, despite its flaws, the values of the West; individual rights, free speech, freedom of the press, equality before the law and the rule of law.” Objectivism upholds values generally associated with Western culture — individualism, reason, and science - but its distinctive development is a moral ideal of “selfishness,” whereby someone’s own happiness is a moral responsibility.
Anyone who can't see the difference between Israel and the rest of the Middle East either isn't looking or is blinded by an agenda (or proselytizing for it).
“We view what happens in Israel as an indicator of what will happen in the rest of the world. To the extent America abandons Israel, it abandons itself Israel is a beacon of civilization in a barbaric, backward area,” Brook said on a recent trip here to visit family with his wife, also an Israeli expatriate, and their two children.
“Israel represents, despite its flaws, the values of the West; individual rights, free speech, freedom of the press, equality before the law and the rule of law.” Objectivism upholds values generally associated with Western culture — individualism, reason, and science - but its distinctive development is a moral ideal of “selfishness,” whereby someone’s own happiness is a moral responsibility.
Anyone who can't see the difference between Israel and the rest of the Middle East either isn't looking or is blinded by an agenda (or proselytizing for it).
Ahmadinejad Speaks Truth to Power
Iranian President Imajihadi (or whatever his name is) on terrorism:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Algiers on Tuesday outlined Iran's policies on regional and global developments. On issue of terrorism, he said, "Terrorism is the ugliest phenomenon which has roots in discrimination, pressure, occupation and trampling on rights of others, deviation from the lofty humanitarian values and mismanagement of certain powers who seek to meet their own interests by imposing their own policies on the world and plundering the wealth of other nations."
Umm, okay.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Algiers on Tuesday outlined Iran's policies on regional and global developments. On issue of terrorism, he said, "Terrorism is the ugliest phenomenon which has roots in discrimination, pressure, occupation and trampling on rights of others, deviation from the lofty humanitarian values and mismanagement of certain powers who seek to meet their own interests by imposing their own policies on the world and plundering the wealth of other nations."
Umm, okay.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 3018, is about the "general strike" being called for on 9/11/07. To me, calling a general strike like this is ludicrous and hopelessly ineffective, even if one's cause were legitimate--and this one seems to have a baker's dozen Leftist causes.
Calling for the strike on the anniversary of the worst attack on American soil, by enemies against which we're still fighting, is immoral and despicable. I predict a complete failure, and I hope for a backlash against this disgusting proposition.
Calling for the strike on the anniversary of the worst attack on American soil, by enemies against which we're still fighting, is immoral and despicable. I predict a complete failure, and I hope for a backlash against this disgusting proposition.
Chinese Autos - Really Unsafe at Any Speed?
Oh. My. God. Those Chinese are sure getting blackeyes lately when it comes to product safety (and as I've always believed, you get what you pay for). Now, it seems their new automobiles are complete deathtraps. Go to Gizmodo to watch a video of a Chinese-made Cherey Amulet positively crushing its driver in the 40mph front-end crash. It's literally the worst crash result I've ever seen.
They're being sold in Russia for a US equivalent $9,000. I don't think there's enough savings there to virtually guarantee being killed in an accident that with other autos would like result in mainly a few bruises.
China better clean up its act soon, or its position as global manufacturer is going to be irreparably damaged.
They're being sold in Russia for a US equivalent $9,000. I don't think there's enough savings there to virtually guarantee being killed in an accident that with other autos would like result in mainly a few bruises.
China better clean up its act soon, or its position as global manufacturer is going to be irreparably damaged.
The Future of Ballistic Weapons?
Go watch this video if you want a look into the future of ballistic weapons. Incredible stuff, in the right hands. Even has some peaceful applications, for those of you who abhor the weapons of war.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Response to Top 10 Presidents List a Whopper
This list of the top 10 best American Presidents is interesting not just for who was picked, but even more so for the 2nd comment. One of the more in-depth comments I've read in awhile.
Iran's Threat Just Propaganda?
It's a dangerous game to be playing here, supposing that any allegations against Iran are merely propaganda and, like the information (allegedly) untrue that supported war with Iraq, subject to inherent doubt. There have been reports of Iranian involvement in Iraq for years, not just months, as anyone who's followed the story would know. And it is, of course, entirely possible that Iran is escalating its involvement, believing that the US is close to being politically forced out of the Iraq.
Stories like the one linked above leave the US defenseless, because any threat that might arise suddenly becomes another "Iraqi WMD lie." One sees it all the time from the Left, in responses to accusations such as these against Iran to reports of planned terrorist attacks (or, even when terrorists are caught in the act). Suddenly, the US is unable to defend itself, because no evidence that it can provide for doing so is acceptable.
Except, maybe, the smouldering ruins of an American city. And maybe not even then.
Stories like the one linked above leave the US defenseless, because any threat that might arise suddenly becomes another "Iraqi WMD lie." One sees it all the time from the Left, in responses to accusations such as these against Iran to reports of planned terrorist attacks (or, even when terrorists are caught in the act). Suddenly, the US is unable to defend itself, because no evidence that it can provide for doing so is acceptable.
Except, maybe, the smouldering ruins of an American city. And maybe not even then.
Capitalism and Dictatorships Together?
And what all these folks fail to realize is that capitalism (true capitalism, not just fascism with a different name) requires an environment that protects invidividual rights to succeed. It can't merely be strapped onto a dictatorship and flourish. For anyone who might want to point to China, note that China is successful in essentially utilizing slave labor, not capitalism.
My First California Earthquake
This is likely of absolutely no interest to anyone other than me, but here's a story about the first earthquake I've experienced since moving to LA a year ago. The epicentre was about 7 miles from my house as the crow flies, so I'm pretty darn happy it wasn't any stronger. Happened at 12:59am, which is a heckuva way to be woken up.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 2688 Diggs, is a link to a story about Google increasing some Gmail accounts to over 9GB. Let me just say that it's refreshing to see a legitimate tech news story get to #1 (at this moment in time), even if the number of Diggs is a little low.
Rich-Poor Gap Growing in China at Quite a Clip
The gap between the rich and poor seems to be growing in China and other Asian countries, according to this story. For China, this is likely more meaningful, since there is already a significant anti-government reform movement in place.
A quote:
China has had Asia's second-biggest and second-fastest-growing wealth gap since the 1990s, exceeded only by war-wracked Nepal on both counts, the bank said in an annual survey.
China has seen thousands of protests in recent years, some of them violent, over land seizures and other economic grievances blamed on the growing gap. The communist government has made improving incomes for the poor a priority, warning last year that inequality has reached "alarming and unacceptable" levels.
"High inequality, particularly high absolute levels of inequality, leads to a disruption in social cohesion. You could have street demonstrations which could lead to violent civil wars," Ifzal Ali, the bank's chief economist, said at a news conference.
This will be worth watching.
A quote:
China has had Asia's second-biggest and second-fastest-growing wealth gap since the 1990s, exceeded only by war-wracked Nepal on both counts, the bank said in an annual survey.
China has seen thousands of protests in recent years, some of them violent, over land seizures and other economic grievances blamed on the growing gap. The communist government has made improving incomes for the poor a priority, warning last year that inequality has reached "alarming and unacceptable" levels.
"High inequality, particularly high absolute levels of inequality, leads to a disruption in social cohesion. You could have street demonstrations which could lead to violent civil wars," Ifzal Ali, the bank's chief economist, said at a news conference.
This will be worth watching.
A Chance to Partner with Russia? Personally, I Think Not
Henry Kissinger, no stranger to realpolitik, seems to think that we should take Putin's counterproposal to Bush's proposed missile defense system seriously. I don't agree, because he assumes that Putin could see the long-term benefit of strategic cooperation between the US and Russia.
So far, all I've seen from Putin is posturing in the opposite direction, trying--as Kissinger says it need not do--to position itself as a superior--or at least equal--power to the US. Putin seems far too fond of the Soviet era to ever join in an effort that would stand in the way of what he seems to want to most--Russia's re-emergence as a superpower.
But, if you want to read the other side of the issue, read the story.
So far, all I've seen from Putin is posturing in the opposite direction, trying--as Kissinger says it need not do--to position itself as a superior--or at least equal--power to the US. Putin seems far too fond of the Soviet era to ever join in an effort that would stand in the way of what he seems to want to most--Russia's re-emergence as a superpower.
But, if you want to read the other side of the issue, read the story.
Soviets Left Lots of Metal Lying Around
I don't know, but this seems like a lot of scrap metal that could be reused for something else. I don't think this much scrap would just sit there for more than a week before somebody would come along and scoop it up.
Russia Sends Out Bombers, Claims US Intercepted Them
Would someone like to tell me why Russia is playing these games? Is Putin really that fond of the Soviet era that he wants to play the role of Kruschev? Sending bombers into sovereign airspace (Georgia) and near American military bases (Guam) are purposeful acts. The only question is, what's Putin trying to prove?
I think our militiary and intelligence agencies are well aware of his capabilities, and so it's not like he actually has a need for a show of strength. It seems like provocation to me, but I don't understand why he'd feel the need.
I think our militiary and intelligence agencies are well aware of his capabilities, and so it's not like he actually has a need for a show of strength. It seems like provocation to me, but I don't understand why he'd feel the need.
Ahmadinejad Losing Support?
Here's a positive spin by The Telegraph on Imajihadi's (or whatever his name is) chances of being reelected. And, it's one I would love to believe: a sort of mini-utopia where the youthful reformers movement manages to elect enough moderates and reformists that even the power "Council of Guardians" can't game this election like they did the last one.
But I have three thoughts on this. First, I'm not that optimistic that any secular force will succeed in determining Iran's future. Second, Imajihadi will be in power through 2009, which gives him plenty of time to continue causing havoc. Third, in reading the linked story, I wonder who really holds the power and is ultimately responsible for the proxy war Iran is fighting against the US in Iraq; if it's the religious sector, then not much will change no matter who's elected.
And, it doesn't change a thing for now. Iran must be forced to end this proxy war, and to give up its nuclear aspirations. And so while this story is positive, it's irrelevant for now.
But I have three thoughts on this. First, I'm not that optimistic that any secular force will succeed in determining Iran's future. Second, Imajihadi will be in power through 2009, which gives him plenty of time to continue causing havoc. Third, in reading the linked story, I wonder who really holds the power and is ultimately responsible for the proxy war Iran is fighting against the US in Iraq; if it's the religious sector, then not much will change no matter who's elected.
And, it doesn't change a thing for now. Iran must be forced to end this proxy war, and to give up its nuclear aspirations. And so while this story is positive, it's irrelevant for now.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
A Little More on the Saudi Arms Deal
Here's a short piece by Alex Epstein, also of the Ayn Rand Institute. In it, he discusses the Saudi arms deal.
The money quote:
"This is absurd," said Alex Epstein, a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute. "The administration has been telling us that we must forgo oil for more costly fuels because our 'addiction to oil' helps finance hostile Middle East regimes--among them Saudi Arabia, which has spent almost $100 billion spreading the terrorists' ideology of Islamic Totalitarianism. And yet at the same time that our leaders demand that we sacrifice oil-consumption for the sake of protection from the Saudis, they are arming the Saudis to the teeth.
"What explains this blatant contradiction? While one might attribute it to simple hypocrisy, the Bush Administration is in fact being consistent. In response to both the Saudi threat and the Iranian threat, our response is not self-assertion, but self-sacrifice. When Saudi Arabia spreads a terrorist ideology around the world, we do not punish that regime, we punish ourselves by rejecting the lifeblood of our civilization.
Read the whole thing.
The money quote:
"This is absurd," said Alex Epstein, a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute. "The administration has been telling us that we must forgo oil for more costly fuels because our 'addiction to oil' helps finance hostile Middle East regimes--among them Saudi Arabia, which has spent almost $100 billion spreading the terrorists' ideology of Islamic Totalitarianism. And yet at the same time that our leaders demand that we sacrifice oil-consumption for the sake of protection from the Saudis, they are arming the Saudis to the teeth.
"What explains this blatant contradiction? While one might attribute it to simple hypocrisy, the Bush Administration is in fact being consistent. In response to both the Saudi threat and the Iranian threat, our response is not self-assertion, but self-sacrifice. When Saudi Arabia spreads a terrorist ideology around the world, we do not punish that regime, we punish ourselves by rejecting the lifeblood of our civilization.
Read the whole thing.
Pharmaceutical Companies Under Attack - and With Them, Us
Here's a piece by Yaron Brook of the Ayn Rand Institute on pharmaceutical price controls. It's an importance piece, because most of the advances in pharmaceuticals occur in the US, and are paid for mainly by Americans. Essentially, we subsidize the drugs for the citizens of those countries like Canada that impose price controls.
"Big pharma" is accused of many devious and downright evil things, including ridiculous conspiracy theories about withholding actual cures for diseases in order to keep selling treatments (which, of course, make no economic sense). But without it, there are many, many people who would either no longer be alive or whose quality of life would be atrocious. I doubt that many who read this don't have a relative or friend whose life has either been saved or positively impacted because of this industry.
I worked for a medical devices company once, which functions the same as the typical pharmaceutical company. For every 10 innovations we made huge investments in trying to perfect, maybe one made it through the FDA and into the market. It's those tremendous R&D costs, which represent the lifeblood of medical advancements, that raise the costs of drugs. If Congress allows the reimportation of drugs from Canada, at Canadian prices, and from elsewhere as well, that R&D will no longer be funded and the incredible advancements will dry up.
If you're against advances in medical science, then you'll call up your Congressman and support the reimportation of drugs from other countries.
"Big pharma" is accused of many devious and downright evil things, including ridiculous conspiracy theories about withholding actual cures for diseases in order to keep selling treatments (which, of course, make no economic sense). But without it, there are many, many people who would either no longer be alive or whose quality of life would be atrocious. I doubt that many who read this don't have a relative or friend whose life has either been saved or positively impacted because of this industry.
I worked for a medical devices company once, which functions the same as the typical pharmaceutical company. For every 10 innovations we made huge investments in trying to perfect, maybe one made it through the FDA and into the market. It's those tremendous R&D costs, which represent the lifeblood of medical advancements, that raise the costs of drugs. If Congress allows the reimportation of drugs from Canada, at Canadian prices, and from elsewhere as well, that R&D will no longer be funded and the incredible advancements will dry up.
If you're against advances in medical science, then you'll call up your Congressman and support the reimportation of drugs from other countries.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 3304, is a link to a story about a "bridge hero" in Minneapolis who was offered a photo opp with President Bush and refused it.
Of course, what's sad is that the Dugg item is buried at the end of the story, and isn't at all relevant to it. Actually, the story's a rather nice discussion about a young man who saved the lives of a bunch of school kids, and how he was being rewarded for his efforts.
Leave it to Digg to, well, dig up the political dirt. Which, by the way, wasn't explained. We have absolutely no way of knowing why the young man turned down the offer. Maybe he was just tired of all the exposure?
Of course, what's sad is that the Dugg item is buried at the end of the story, and isn't at all relevant to it. Actually, the story's a rather nice discussion about a young man who saved the lives of a bunch of school kids, and how he was being rewarded for his efforts.
Leave it to Digg to, well, dig up the political dirt. Which, by the way, wasn't explained. We have absolutely no way of knowing why the young man turned down the offer. Maybe he was just tired of all the exposure?
China's Internal Issues and What They Mean for America
An interesting discussion on China and it's internal troubles. I've often vascilated between worrying about China economically, and not (but I still worry about them as a future military threat, unless they move completely away from communism). This piece has some interesting points to make.
I'll quote a few:
China is loudly whispering that they may start selling off some of their holdings of US Treasury debt. The last I heard, they have about $1.3 trillion in dollar-denominated instruments, up from about $1 trillion last fall. About $400 billion of this is in long-dated debt like notes and bonds.
...
Now the real problem here is that China's threats are empty. Forget about the threats to the stability of the US economy. The last time the Chinese talked about diversifying out of US Treasuries, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke went on record saying that he would simply sterilize and/or monetize any large Chinese sales of US debt. Don't underestimate his willingness to follow through on this, and don't underrate the Fed's ability to keep the resulting inflation under control without significantly disrupting the US economy.
But even more to the point is that there just aren't any asset classes in the world, apart from US Treasuries, that are liquid enough to soak up $400 billion or more should China go shopping for them. Again, the Chinese threat is empty.
His conclusion:
The true challenge for us is to find a way to exploit the weakness in China's position. China cares about nothing more than their prestige and standing in the world community. Not only is this deeply ingrained in the Chinese character, but it's also one of the keys to the current government's tenuous hold on legitimacy. They'll probably be willing to trade away a good deal in order to avoid being seen as having messed up their transition to a globally-dominant market economy.
The proper focus for our China foreign policy is to find a way to keep China permanently dependent on us for increases in prosperity, while forcing them to give American investors a considerably larger stake in what is the biggest growth-engine in the world. If I can figure out how best to do that, I'll let you know.
I'd read the whole thing if I were you.
I'll quote a few:
China is loudly whispering that they may start selling off some of their holdings of US Treasury debt. The last I heard, they have about $1.3 trillion in dollar-denominated instruments, up from about $1 trillion last fall. About $400 billion of this is in long-dated debt like notes and bonds.
...
Now the real problem here is that China's threats are empty. Forget about the threats to the stability of the US economy. The last time the Chinese talked about diversifying out of US Treasuries, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke went on record saying that he would simply sterilize and/or monetize any large Chinese sales of US debt. Don't underestimate his willingness to follow through on this, and don't underrate the Fed's ability to keep the resulting inflation under control without significantly disrupting the US economy.
But even more to the point is that there just aren't any asset classes in the world, apart from US Treasuries, that are liquid enough to soak up $400 billion or more should China go shopping for them. Again, the Chinese threat is empty.
His conclusion:
The true challenge for us is to find a way to exploit the weakness in China's position. China cares about nothing more than their prestige and standing in the world community. Not only is this deeply ingrained in the Chinese character, but it's also one of the keys to the current government's tenuous hold on legitimacy. They'll probably be willing to trade away a good deal in order to avoid being seen as having messed up their transition to a globally-dominant market economy.
The proper focus for our China foreign policy is to find a way to keep China permanently dependent on us for increases in prosperity, while forcing them to give American investors a considerably larger stake in what is the biggest growth-engine in the world. If I can figure out how best to do that, I'll let you know.
I'd read the whole thing if I were you.
Russian Engages in Military Exercises Over North Pole
And I suppose it's just one big coincidence that Russia's engaging in military exercises over the North Pole. If you believe that, I have a bridge for sale.
Didn't Take Long: Predicted Action Taken Against Russian Oil Company Owner
I mentioned this guy, Mikhail Gutseriev, awhile back, and predicted that his outspoken stance against the expropriation of his oil company would land him in trouble. Well, it's happened. Shares in his company, Russneft, have been frozen, and he's now being accused of tax evasion and "illegal entrepreneurship." I'm sure it'll be off to the gulag for him soon.
And, for those who don't know, "illegal entrepreneurship" in Russian (and Soviet) lingo basically means doing business without the state's blessing. I remember my wife telling me about her mom's black market sewing business back in the USSR--that would have been "illegal entrepreneurship" as well.
And, for those who don't know, "illegal entrepreneurship" in Russian (and Soviet) lingo basically means doing business without the state's blessing. I remember my wife telling me about her mom's black market sewing business back in the USSR--that would have been "illegal entrepreneurship" as well.
Hillary Clinton's True Character
Here's a rather in-depth (and well worth it) essay by Ed Cline in The Rule of Reason, on the paper that Hillary Clinton wrote during college and is apparently circulating the Internet (although this is the first I've heard of it). It's an appalling and, frankly, frightening look into Clinton's character, and until some other candidate is defined so clearly it makes her the least desirable.
Mr. Cline's essay is long, but I'll post the quote that best sums up Clinton (and note that there's a great deal of analysis that backs this up):
It takes a village, or a Toohey, or an Alinsky, to fill such a void. This is a candidate for the Presidency of the United States. Hillary has progressed from doubting the effectiveness of massive government programs to help the poor to seeing them as the only answer, in the name of “social justice.” Like Alinsky, like Toohey, she wishes to crush the individualist independence of Americans and replace it with dependence on the state – and she would be the state – chiefly because she has grown to fear and hate independence in anyone.
No matter how slickly “human” she presents her made-over self to the public in debates or during interviews, one can still detect in her the desire to kill in every American his integrity, self-respect, sense of values, the heroic, and happiness. When she left Wellesley, she decided to become the “star,” someone whom uncounted others would come to depend on and thank for that dependence.
Read the whole thing. It's well worth it.
Mr. Cline's essay is long, but I'll post the quote that best sums up Clinton (and note that there's a great deal of analysis that backs this up):
It takes a village, or a Toohey, or an Alinsky, to fill such a void. This is a candidate for the Presidency of the United States. Hillary has progressed from doubting the effectiveness of massive government programs to help the poor to seeing them as the only answer, in the name of “social justice.” Like Alinsky, like Toohey, she wishes to crush the individualist independence of Americans and replace it with dependence on the state – and she would be the state – chiefly because she has grown to fear and hate independence in anyone.
No matter how slickly “human” she presents her made-over self to the public in debates or during interviews, one can still detect in her the desire to kill in every American his integrity, self-respect, sense of values, the heroic, and happiness. When she left Wellesley, she decided to become the “star,” someone whom uncounted others would come to depend on and thank for that dependence.
Read the whole thing. It's well worth it.
New Bomb Explodes, and Then Explodes Again
As I think I've mentioned before, I'm all for our military developing the most powerful weapons imaginable. It's called deterrence, you see: the more powerful we are, the less likely some tinpot dictator is to start something with us (or, the not-so-tinpot dictators, as well).
Well, it appears our military agrees, because it's developed a bomb that not only explodes, but is made of reactive materials that themselves explode upon contact. And interestingly enough, they should even appeal to the anti-war crowd, for whom the alternative, cluster bombs, have been such an issue. See, the new bomb won't leave behind any unexploded ordnance (or, I suppose, not much).
There are those who think such constant improvements in weaponry is just the military-industrial complex gone mad. But that's only because they refuse to recognize that there really are bad people out there who plan very bad things for us (and by that, I mean Americans) for any number of reasons. There are evil things happening all over the planet with which the US is completely uninvolved, and yet there are those who think that only America is capable of doing wrong.
I'm just glad that others, like the inventors of this kind of weaponry, don't give a damn what they think and just keep coming up with good stuff.
Well, it appears our military agrees, because it's developed a bomb that not only explodes, but is made of reactive materials that themselves explode upon contact. And interestingly enough, they should even appeal to the anti-war crowd, for whom the alternative, cluster bombs, have been such an issue. See, the new bomb won't leave behind any unexploded ordnance (or, I suppose, not much).
There are those who think such constant improvements in weaponry is just the military-industrial complex gone mad. But that's only because they refuse to recognize that there really are bad people out there who plan very bad things for us (and by that, I mean Americans) for any number of reasons. There are evil things happening all over the planet with which the US is completely uninvolved, and yet there are those who think that only America is capable of doing wrong.
I'm just glad that others, like the inventors of this kind of weaponry, don't give a damn what they think and just keep coming up with good stuff.
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
NASA Creates Plan for Nuke-Based Asteroid Protection
You know, it's stories like this that convince me that the government knows a little more than it's letting on about an impending asteroid strike. Don't get me wrong: I'm all for them keeping it secret. Things might get a little crazy if word were to get out.
This particular NASA design would use nukes to nudge an asteroid out of the Earth's path. Funny, but they're only proposing 1.2 megaton warheads, albeit on six separate units. Nevertheless, I would have expected larger weapons. But, they're the mathematicians, not me.
The next closest asteroid that we (the public, I mean) know about is the Apophis asteroid that's supposed to pass between the Earth and the Moon in 2029. I understand that in astronomical terms, that's pretty darn close.
I've not always been a 100% fan of NASA, wondering whether it's government's business to explore space. Now, I'm a believer. Give NASA all the funding it needs.
This particular NASA design would use nukes to nudge an asteroid out of the Earth's path. Funny, but they're only proposing 1.2 megaton warheads, albeit on six separate units. Nevertheless, I would have expected larger weapons. But, they're the mathematicians, not me.
The next closest asteroid that we (the public, I mean) know about is the Apophis asteroid that's supposed to pass between the Earth and the Moon in 2029. I understand that in astronomical terms, that's pretty darn close.
I've not always been a 100% fan of NASA, wondering whether it's government's business to explore space. Now, I'm a believer. Give NASA all the funding it needs.
Cox and Forkum on Penn and Chavez
Cox and Forkum on Sean Penn's recent visit with Chavez. As usual, they illustrate their point better than I could state it.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 3792 Diggs, is a link to a story about one of Digg's pet issues: the legalization of marijuana (with which I agree, incidentally). Apparently, some group (I didn't read the entire story) has offered to give $1 billion to the state to help offset budgetary issues.
At least it's a story with some sort of significance, even if it is a bit out there.
At least it's a story with some sort of significance, even if it is a bit out there.
Celebrity Report: Mia Farrow Offers Herself for Sacrifice
Celebrity Report: Actress Mia Farrows has offered herself up as a hostage for, well, I'll quote:
Suleiman Jamous, a moderate who has been a key link between Darfur rebels and aid workers in the beleaguered Sudanese region, is in a U.N. hospital suffering from abdominal problems. The U.N. said he is free to leave, but he fears arrest or government reprisal.
Her letter to Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir:
"As you are undoubtedly aware, Mr. Jamous is in need of a medical procedure that cannot be carried out in Kadugli. I am therefore offering to take Mr. Jamous' place, to exchange my freedom for his, in the knowledge of his importance to the civilians of Darfur and in the conviction that he will apply his energies toward creating the just and lasting peace that the Sudanese people deserve and hope for."
While the altruism inherent in this offer is remarkable for its clarity, and as an Objectivist I find altruism to be the amongst greatest evils of the age, one has to give some credit where credit is due. At least Ms. Farrow, unlike other celebrities who give lip service to their dedication to the Darfur cause, has actually put something of value on the line--the fact that it would be a terrible self-sacrifice notwithstanding.
Suleiman Jamous, a moderate who has been a key link between Darfur rebels and aid workers in the beleaguered Sudanese region, is in a U.N. hospital suffering from abdominal problems. The U.N. said he is free to leave, but he fears arrest or government reprisal.
Her letter to Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir:
"As you are undoubtedly aware, Mr. Jamous is in need of a medical procedure that cannot be carried out in Kadugli. I am therefore offering to take Mr. Jamous' place, to exchange my freedom for his, in the knowledge of his importance to the civilians of Darfur and in the conviction that he will apply his energies toward creating the just and lasting peace that the Sudanese people deserve and hope for."
While the altruism inherent in this offer is remarkable for its clarity, and as an Objectivist I find altruism to be the amongst greatest evils of the age, one has to give some credit where credit is due. At least Ms. Farrow, unlike other celebrities who give lip service to their dedication to the Darfur cause, has actually put something of value on the line--the fact that it would be a terrible self-sacrifice notwithstanding.
Ayn Rand Institute on 2007 Farm Bill
Here's a quick piece from the Ayn Rand Institute on the 2007 Farm Bill. Just a quick quote:
"The focus of Americans' energy concerns should be the continuing growth and progress of industrial civilization, which progressively improves the length and quality of our lives--including our ability to cope with any bad weather. This requires liberating energy producers of all kinds to produce and sell abundant, cheap energy. The new 'progressive' farm bill does the exact opposite. It enables contribution-grubbing, central-planning energy ignoramuses in Washington to whimsically bestow favors or impose punishments on energy producers--while at the same time continuing to pass legislation that severely restricts the production of practical, plentiful, life-giving energy from fossil fuels and nuclear power.
Now go read the rest.
"The focus of Americans' energy concerns should be the continuing growth and progress of industrial civilization, which progressively improves the length and quality of our lives--including our ability to cope with any bad weather. This requires liberating energy producers of all kinds to produce and sell abundant, cheap energy. The new 'progressive' farm bill does the exact opposite. It enables contribution-grubbing, central-planning energy ignoramuses in Washington to whimsically bestow favors or impose punishments on energy producers--while at the same time continuing to pass legislation that severely restricts the production of practical, plentiful, life-giving energy from fossil fuels and nuclear power.
Now go read the rest.
Carbon Credits = Feudalism? Maybe So
Here's a short bit in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on the "carbon credits" movement and how it creates a new form of feudalism.
A quote:
Under the ruse of "protecting the planet," certain well-connected bureaucrats and politicians will determine how much coal, wood or petroleum products they will allow a person, business and even a country to use.
This resembles the government-chartered monopolies in the age of mercantilism. In fact, it will be a type of Marxist monopoly envisioned in Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged." And who stands to benefit for this feudal right to allocate resources and sell the permission to use carbon?
Well said, I think. Read the story to learn who benefits.
A quote:
Under the ruse of "protecting the planet," certain well-connected bureaucrats and politicians will determine how much coal, wood or petroleum products they will allow a person, business and even a country to use.
This resembles the government-chartered monopolies in the age of mercantilism. In fact, it will be a type of Marxist monopoly envisioned in Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged." And who stands to benefit for this feudal right to allocate resources and sell the permission to use carbon?
Well said, I think. Read the story to learn who benefits.
Muslim Immigration and Europe
Here's an interesting discussion on the impact of Muslim immigration on Europe. This is an unproven source, and so one would need to verify the facts to fully support the conclusions drawn. But, I have seen similar statistics elsewhere, and so I tend to believe that this post has some truth to it.
The money quote:
In Europe, Muslims already make up more than 25 percent of the population of Marseilles, 15 percent of Brussels and Paris, and 10 percent of Amsterdam, for example. And these numbers are rising fast. Indeed, demographers predict that the number of Muslims living in Europe may double again by 2015. Thus Princeton University’s Bernard Lewis, one of the world’s most distinguished scholars of the Arab and Islamic cultures, recently told the German newspaper Die Welt that: “Europe will be Islamic by the end of the century.”
The money quote:
In Europe, Muslims already make up more than 25 percent of the population of Marseilles, 15 percent of Brussels and Paris, and 10 percent of Amsterdam, for example. And these numbers are rising fast. Indeed, demographers predict that the number of Muslims living in Europe may double again by 2015. Thus Princeton University’s Bernard Lewis, one of the world’s most distinguished scholars of the Arab and Islamic cultures, recently told the German newspaper Die Welt that: “Europe will be Islamic by the end of the century.”
Did Russia Fire Missile into Georgian Territory?
Did they or didn't they? Georgia is accusing Russia of firing a missile from a fighter in Georgian airspace in an "act of aggression." Russia, of course, denies it. Personally, I believe the flyover was on purpose, but maybe the missile release was accidental.
Some excerpts:
President Mikhail Saakashvili visited the site of the incident, where missile debris bearing Cyrillic writing was found, and demanded a condemnation from the European Union. "This is not Georgia's problem. This a problem for European security and safety," he said. "This was a provocation calculated for only one reason - to disrupt the peace in Georgia. This is sowing panic in society and [is aimed at] changing the political course of the country," said the pro-Western President.
This follows along with Russian's general attitude toward the pro-Western Georgian government:
Russia has gradually tightened the screws on the former Soviet republic since the 2004 election of Mr Saakashvili, who wants to take Georgia into Nato and the EU. Georgia is virtually under a complete trade embargo ordered by the Kremlin, with Russia having banned wine and mineral water exports, halted transport links and recently introduced visa restrictions against the Georgians.
I hope that we continue to support Georgia, and I doubt that we're doing enough.
Some excerpts:
President Mikhail Saakashvili visited the site of the incident, where missile debris bearing Cyrillic writing was found, and demanded a condemnation from the European Union. "This is not Georgia's problem. This a problem for European security and safety," he said. "This was a provocation calculated for only one reason - to disrupt the peace in Georgia. This is sowing panic in society and [is aimed at] changing the political course of the country," said the pro-Western President.
This follows along with Russian's general attitude toward the pro-Western Georgian government:
Russia has gradually tightened the screws on the former Soviet republic since the 2004 election of Mr Saakashvili, who wants to take Georgia into Nato and the EU. Georgia is virtually under a complete trade embargo ordered by the Kremlin, with Russia having banned wine and mineral water exports, halted transport links and recently introduced visa restrictions against the Georgians.
I hope that we continue to support Georgia, and I doubt that we're doing enough.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Class-Action Lawsuit Against Google/YouTube Growing
YouTube's getting in hotter and hotter water. The class-action lawsuit I mentioned earlier is growing. Essentially, the intellectual property environment's a little more complex than I've seen mentioned before:
Unlike the music labels such as Universal and EMI, which own copyrights to specific recordings of songs, the NMPA owns copyrights to music lyrics and specific melodies. Media companies that wish to use music usually have to obtain licenses from both the music label and the NMPA, as pointed out by the Wall Street Journal —something that YouTube has not done when forming agreements with the four major labels to use their music on the site in exchange for a cut of ad revenue.
And being a class-action suit, merely settling out of court will be a little more difficult. Each party's going to have their own agenda.
This does nothing but strengthen my believe that Google is a bit cavalier in how it approaches intellectual property, and that this is going to cost them.
Unlike the music labels such as Universal and EMI, which own copyrights to specific recordings of songs, the NMPA owns copyrights to music lyrics and specific melodies. Media companies that wish to use music usually have to obtain licenses from both the music label and the NMPA, as pointed out by the Wall Street Journal —something that YouTube has not done when forming agreements with the four major labels to use their music on the site in exchange for a cut of ad revenue.
And being a class-action suit, merely settling out of court will be a little more difficult. Each party's going to have their own agenda.
This does nothing but strengthen my believe that Google is a bit cavalier in how it approaches intellectual property, and that this is going to cost them.
Russian's New "Anti-Westernism"
An interesting read in the Moscow Times on Russia's growing anti-Western stance. Some excerpts:
The Russian political elite has long dreamed of finding a national idea capable of rallying the people. Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev tried to consolidate the country with his idea of socialism "with a human face." Former President Boris Yeltsin roused the people around anti-communism.
And President Vladimir Putin came to power under the unofficial slogan: "Let's put an end to the Yeltsin-era chaos." Now the elite is pushing a new national idea to rally the nation. It can be stated as follows: "We will protect the country from external enemies and establish a new global order to replace the one that so humiliated Russia in the 1990s." To put it more simply, Putin's motto is: "Russia is back!"
And then:
What is behind the new national idea? Anti-Western ideology has become an important factor that legitimizes the highly centralized state. The Kremlin has to offer some kind of explanation for the concentration of authority in so few hands, the elimination of political pluralism, the expansion of the state's role in the economy and the redistribution of property. The search for enemies and the cultivation of a "siege mentality" have always been used to justify "iron-hand" regimes in Russia. To be sure, the Kremlin also has created smaller enemies, such as Georgia, Ukraine, and the Baltic states. In addition, liberals and certain unpopular oligarchs serve as convenient adversaries. But a great power should not be shooting at sparrows with a cannon or focusing so much attention on "small fries," as one Russian analyst said. The West, and especially the United States, has proven to be the most convincing enemy.
And yet, interestingly:
Fortunately, the majority of people have managed to avoid getting caught up in the anti-Western hysteria. Polls show that 70 percent of Russians still consider Europe to be a partner. But there are definite consequences to the Kremlin's heavy anti-Western propaganda. The elite, which has built a political and foreign policy program based on anti-Western ideas, cannot easily switch back to the opposite position. That is the legacy Putin leaves behind -- a legacy built by everyone who today shouts with such enthusiasm, "Russia is back!"
It's an interesting read that explains quite a bit.
The Russian political elite has long dreamed of finding a national idea capable of rallying the people. Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev tried to consolidate the country with his idea of socialism "with a human face." Former President Boris Yeltsin roused the people around anti-communism.
And President Vladimir Putin came to power under the unofficial slogan: "Let's put an end to the Yeltsin-era chaos." Now the elite is pushing a new national idea to rally the nation. It can be stated as follows: "We will protect the country from external enemies and establish a new global order to replace the one that so humiliated Russia in the 1990s." To put it more simply, Putin's motto is: "Russia is back!"
And then:
What is behind the new national idea? Anti-Western ideology has become an important factor that legitimizes the highly centralized state. The Kremlin has to offer some kind of explanation for the concentration of authority in so few hands, the elimination of political pluralism, the expansion of the state's role in the economy and the redistribution of property. The search for enemies and the cultivation of a "siege mentality" have always been used to justify "iron-hand" regimes in Russia. To be sure, the Kremlin also has created smaller enemies, such as Georgia, Ukraine, and the Baltic states. In addition, liberals and certain unpopular oligarchs serve as convenient adversaries. But a great power should not be shooting at sparrows with a cannon or focusing so much attention on "small fries," as one Russian analyst said. The West, and especially the United States, has proven to be the most convincing enemy.
And yet, interestingly:
Fortunately, the majority of people have managed to avoid getting caught up in the anti-Western hysteria. Polls show that 70 percent of Russians still consider Europe to be a partner. But there are definite consequences to the Kremlin's heavy anti-Western propaganda. The elite, which has built a political and foreign policy program based on anti-Western ideas, cannot easily switch back to the opposite position. That is the legacy Putin leaves behind -- a legacy built by everyone who today shouts with such enthusiasm, "Russia is back!"
It's an interesting read that explains quite a bit.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at a light 2833 Diggs, is a link to a list of "20 Things I Learned from Tech Support." It's cute, as are many such lists.
Yahoo!'s China Troubles Keep Growing
I think things are going to get tougher for Yahoo! in their Chinese troubles before they get any easier. I remain torn on whether American businesses should do business with nations that don't recognize individual rights (my natural inclination as an Objectivist is to say that they should not), but this quote is unsupportable:
Yahoo! has always said its Chinese subsidiary was only obeying local laws.
Such a stance can be taken to support any action, no matter how evil. It could have been used to justify a company's direct support of and business with the Nazis. After all, the Holocaust was simply the result of local German laws.
Yahoo! has always said its Chinese subsidiary was only obeying local laws.
Such a stance can be taken to support any action, no matter how evil. It could have been used to justify a company's direct support of and business with the Nazis. After all, the Holocaust was simply the result of local German laws.
Russian and China Play War Games
The Russian/Chinese joint military exercises being discussed for some time now seem a bit larger than necessary for anti-terrorism activities, specifically, unless it were anti-terrorism of the "invade a territory and root out terrorists" variety. The linked story speculates that it could be a show of defiance against NATO.
Which, of course, if true, is of concern.
Which, of course, if true, is of concern.
Russia Continues Showing Two Faces
Russia needs to decide whether it wants to join in the European missile shield program, or whether it wants to continue seeing it as a threat to Russia. Because continuing to talk about alternatives to the American plan while developing new weapons to defeat the system is just self-contradictory and tiresome.
Other than merely envying America's currently dominating role in the world, I just don't see much reason for Russia to believe that the West is a threat to them. Sure, we're cozying up to some of Russia's neighbors, but Russia isn't supposed to be an enemy any longer. They're supposed to be a "democracy," (in quotes because I hate that term), and "democracies" aren't supposed to fight wars. At least, it's never happened in the past.
Perhaps Russia perceives a threat because it knows itself that its turn toward totalitarianism (of a more national socialist nature) will eventually bring it at odds with the West. Hell, maybe it's already happening. As far as I can tell, Russia has no intention of joining the West and supporting individual rights (to the extent that the West does so, of course), and so perhaps it's just preparing itself for the inevitable.
Other than merely envying America's currently dominating role in the world, I just don't see much reason for Russia to believe that the West is a threat to them. Sure, we're cozying up to some of Russia's neighbors, but Russia isn't supposed to be an enemy any longer. They're supposed to be a "democracy," (in quotes because I hate that term), and "democracies" aren't supposed to fight wars. At least, it's never happened in the past.
Perhaps Russia perceives a threat because it knows itself that its turn toward totalitarianism (of a more national socialist nature) will eventually bring it at odds with the West. Hell, maybe it's already happening. As far as I can tell, Russia has no intention of joining the West and supporting individual rights (to the extent that the West does so, of course), and so perhaps it's just preparing itself for the inevitable.
Monday, August 06, 2007
Presidential Candidate Tom Tancredo Suggests Attacks on Mecca and Medina if US is Nuked
I'm sure I'll be roasted for this, if it gets any wide readership, but I don't necessarily disagree with Republican Presidential candidate Tom Tancredo when he suggests that one way to avoid an Islamic fundamentalist nuclear attack on the US is to establish a policy that such an attack would result in equal attacks against Mecca and Medina.
If taken seriously, this would have two affects. First, it would certainly give the state sponsors of terrorism, who would be the ones to give the terrorists the weapons in the first place, reason to give the whole matter some thought. Second, once they thought about it, it would give them reason to actively seek out any and all terrorists who might be considering such an attack, and make sure it doesn't happen.
Is it a harsh policy? Certainly. But then, a nuclear attack against the US would have harsh repercussions, not just for the US. In fact, targeting Mecca and Medina would result in far fewer human losses than targeting Tehran and Damascus. And it would demonstrate that the US is not a nation to be trifled with--which is the one lesson al Qaeda and other terrorists organizations haven't yet learned (because we haven't taught it to them).
All they understand is strength. And such a policy would represent the sort of strength that they would certainly understand. After all, their targets on 9/11 were of just as much symbolic value to Americans as these holy sites are to Muslims, and yet the terrorists had no problem attacking them. In fact, that was the point--which should be the point of our policy, as well.
If taken seriously, this would have two affects. First, it would certainly give the state sponsors of terrorism, who would be the ones to give the terrorists the weapons in the first place, reason to give the whole matter some thought. Second, once they thought about it, it would give them reason to actively seek out any and all terrorists who might be considering such an attack, and make sure it doesn't happen.
Is it a harsh policy? Certainly. But then, a nuclear attack against the US would have harsh repercussions, not just for the US. In fact, targeting Mecca and Medina would result in far fewer human losses than targeting Tehran and Damascus. And it would demonstrate that the US is not a nation to be trifled with--which is the one lesson al Qaeda and other terrorists organizations haven't yet learned (because we haven't taught it to them).
All they understand is strength. And such a policy would represent the sort of strength that they would certainly understand. After all, their targets on 9/11 were of just as much symbolic value to Americans as these holy sites are to Muslims, and yet the terrorists had no problem attacking them. In fact, that was the point--which should be the point of our policy, as well.
The Register Reports Shocking News That Sales Went Up and Prices Went Down
Umm, news to the Register: in elastic markets (like computer chips) sales typically do go up as prices go down. That's a result of this thing called "economics." In fact, and this might come as a surprise to the story's writer, companies sometimes actually lower prices on purpose to increase sales.
Read the story. It actually states that, although sales were up, chipmakers were hurt because prices were lower. I don't mind a little ignorance in a journalist, but man, this is a doozy.
Read the story. It actually states that, although sales were up, chipmakers were hurt because prices were lower. I don't mind a little ignorance in a journalist, but man, this is a doozy.
Founders Believed in Seperation of Church and State
A tremendous post on the Rule of Reason blog supports with copious amounts of evidence the notion that America was not founded on Christian moral principles. It's an important discussion of the need and justification for the seperation of church and state.
It's not a short read, but I won't quote any here because it's too tightly-written an essay to quote from. If you care at all about the issue, you'll read the piece in its entirety.
It's not a short read, but I won't quote any here because it's too tightly-written an essay to quote from. If you care at all about the issue, you'll read the piece in its entirety.
Miltary Loses Track of 190,000 Weapons in Iraq
I'm not sure what I find worse about this MSNBC story, that we've lost track of 190,000 assault rifles and pistols provided to Iraqi security personnel, or that we were giving them AK-47's instead of American weapons. From my limited military perspective, that would seem, well, stupid.
I was in the military, as it happens, and so I know how these things can happen. The military's a bureaucracy like any other, and when things are rushed and policies not followed (as seems to be case here), things like this are commonplace. The lost of the weapons, I mean. But, at the risk of repeating myself, I still don't get that we were handing out AK-47's.
I was in the military, as it happens, and so I know how these things can happen. The military's a bureaucracy like any other, and when things are rushed and policies not followed (as seems to be case here), things like this are commonplace. The lost of the weapons, I mean. But, at the risk of repeating myself, I still don't get that we were handing out AK-47's.
Cox and Forkum on Islamic Crackdown on Concert Attendees
Cox and Forkum on a recent arrest of 230 Iranian youths attending a private concert. Apparently, the arrest is part of an effort to crackdown on the sort of "immoral" behavior defined during the original Islamic Revolution.
With Imajihadi (or whatever his name is) as lunatic President and with Islamic totalitarianism on the rise, nah, there's no reason for the US to be concerned about Iran.
With Imajihadi (or whatever his name is) as lunatic President and with Islamic totalitarianism on the rise, nah, there's no reason for the US to be concerned about Iran.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 5929 Diggs, is a link to a picture of Kevin Mitnick's business cards. For those who don't see hacking as a criminal activity, I suppose this is sort of like hero-worship. To others, well, it's not.
Ron Paul's Appeal is to the Internet's Youngsters
I agree that this is fascinating: Ron Paul barely registers in the mainstream of the 2008 Presidental campaign, but on the Internet, he's #1 over both Dems and Republicans. CNET suggests that perhaps it's an age thing, that Paul's positions resonate with the Internet's younger demographics.
I'll buy that. I think it also relegates the Internet to relative unimportance in contemporary politics.
I'll buy that. I think it also relegates the Internet to relative unimportance in contemporary politics.
Google/YouTube Sued for Copyright Infringement
And therein lies the rub: yes, Google/YouTube might remove copyrighted material whenever requested, but by that time, the cat's already out of the bag. With tools for downloading video from YouTube, by the time it's removed thousands or even millions of copies might already have been made.
These services must devise methods to prohibit the infringement in the first place. How they do so is up to them, but until they do, they're providing a platform for committing crimes. At the very least, such civil actions as that discussed in the linked CNET story should succeed.
These services must devise methods to prohibit the infringement in the first place. How they do so is up to them, but until they do, they're providing a platform for committing crimes. At the very least, such civil actions as that discussed in the linked CNET story should succeed.
Boing Boing Interviews Sudhir Vankatesh About Street Gangs
Boing Boing posts about an upcoming book by Sudhir Venkatesh (author of Freakonomics) on street gangs. To be titled Gang Leader for a Day, the author had this to say in an interview at Columbia University:
Q: How do gang members see themselves as fitting in with society at large? Do gang members have a real comprehension that the things they do — dealing drugs, engaging in violence, destroying property, scaring people — are widely perceived as not only illegal but also morally wrong?
A: Many gang members who attain leadership status are deeply conscious of their perception by wider society. They tend to make two arguments when discussing their behavior: first, that whites also work in the underground economy but are not prosecuted (or stigmatized) to the same degree (just look at the differential rates of punishment for powder cocaine and crack cocaine — the former is distributed by whites to a far greater degree); and second, that corporations also engage in criminal activity, but are rarely viewed as outlaws — not just Enron, but oil and other companies that have established histories of supporting anti-democratic regimes in developing counties to secure their own profits.
What fascinates me the most about the gang leader's answer is this part: "that corporations also engage in criminal activity, but are rarely viewed as outlaws." If the book is supposed to show that gang leaders are actually in touch with what's really going on, then it's already failed. American corporations and businesspeople are perhaps the single most persecuted group in American society, being blamed for everything from pure greed to outright evil. If the only example this gang leader can think of is Enron, than he's not very well read.
Q: How do gang members see themselves as fitting in with society at large? Do gang members have a real comprehension that the things they do — dealing drugs, engaging in violence, destroying property, scaring people — are widely perceived as not only illegal but also morally wrong?
A: Many gang members who attain leadership status are deeply conscious of their perception by wider society. They tend to make two arguments when discussing their behavior: first, that whites also work in the underground economy but are not prosecuted (or stigmatized) to the same degree (just look at the differential rates of punishment for powder cocaine and crack cocaine — the former is distributed by whites to a far greater degree); and second, that corporations also engage in criminal activity, but are rarely viewed as outlaws — not just Enron, but oil and other companies that have established histories of supporting anti-democratic regimes in developing counties to secure their own profits.
What fascinates me the most about the gang leader's answer is this part: "that corporations also engage in criminal activity, but are rarely viewed as outlaws." If the book is supposed to show that gang leaders are actually in touch with what's really going on, then it's already failed. American corporations and businesspeople are perhaps the single most persecuted group in American society, being blamed for everything from pure greed to outright evil. If the only example this gang leader can think of is Enron, than he's not very well read.
Iran and Saudi Arabia: Allies?
Once again, a very dubious source, but imagine if this post is true. The money quote:
Iran's President and the king of Saudi Arabia stressed on boosting unity and brotherhood among Muslims in a phone conversation.
If this conversation actually took place, and has any real meaning, then we just promised $20 billion to an Arab that hopes to be allied with Iran.
Somehow I doubt it really means anything (and the $20 billion to Saudi Arabia can't really be made any worse), but it's just creepy.
Iran's President and the king of Saudi Arabia stressed on boosting unity and brotherhood among Muslims in a phone conversation.
If this conversation actually took place, and has any real meaning, then we just promised $20 billion to an Arab that hopes to be allied with Iran.
Somehow I doubt it really means anything (and the $20 billion to Saudi Arabia can't really be made any worse), but it's just creepy.
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 2869 Diggs, is a link to what the poster calls the most "intense" tattoo you'll ever see. I say, it's the most grotesque.
Ahmadinejad Says Israel Should "go find somewhere else" To Live
I wonder a bit about this source, but if true, then Iranian President Imajihadi (or whatever his name is) has put his foot into it again. Here's a quote:
Iran's outspoken President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called on Israel to "go find somewhere else" for its state and leave its territory for the creation of a Palestinian state, according to an interview published Saturday. "Our support (for the Palestinian people) is unconditional.
I'm sure that, as usual, this will be downplayed by the Left as merely mistranslation, as with the hundreds of other such statements he's made. If this source is valid, it's just another piece in a long line of evidence that Iran is led by a madman.
Iran's outspoken President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called on Israel to "go find somewhere else" for its state and leave its territory for the creation of a Palestinian state, according to an interview published Saturday. "Our support (for the Palestinian people) is unconditional.
I'm sure that, as usual, this will be downplayed by the Left as merely mistranslation, as with the hundreds of other such statements he's made. If this source is valid, it's just another piece in a long line of evidence that Iran is led by a madman.
China Publishes Anti-Corruption Game
The Chinese government is taking corruption seriously: it created a game where the object is to kill all corrupt officials on the way to a corruption-free paradise. This is, I suppose, to prepare future Chinese leaders to avoid corruption.
There's an irony there. Leave a comment if you've noticed it.
There's an irony there. Leave a comment if you've noticed it.
Some More on "Sicko"
Here's a nice short essay on "Sicko," by our favorite Leftist, Michael Moore. Some quotes:
One of "Sicko's" recommended models, the so-called free medical system in Sweden, requires a 13.9 percent gross income tax with no exemptions on total personal income, plus employer and general fund contributions to pay for it. This, when coupled with a co-pay system that collects from patients $13 to $30 for each doctor visit, prescription, and specialist consultations at clinics, by definition makes the Swedish medical system not a free lunch.
...
In fact, it can be argued some welfare state healthcare systems such the U.K.'s are evolving into two systems based upon who pays. Those who have means to pay have access to spa-like personal service, and those who don't want to, or those who do not have the means, join waiting lists and in many cases receive treatment in a Spartan-like environment.
It's a short piece, and barely scratches the surface, but worth a quick read nonetheless.
One of "Sicko's" recommended models, the so-called free medical system in Sweden, requires a 13.9 percent gross income tax with no exemptions on total personal income, plus employer and general fund contributions to pay for it. This, when coupled with a co-pay system that collects from patients $13 to $30 for each doctor visit, prescription, and specialist consultations at clinics, by definition makes the Swedish medical system not a free lunch.
...
In fact, it can be argued some welfare state healthcare systems such the U.K.'s are evolving into two systems based upon who pays. Those who have means to pay have access to spa-like personal service, and those who don't want to, or those who do not have the means, join waiting lists and in many cases receive treatment in a Spartan-like environment.
It's a short piece, and barely scratches the surface, but worth a quick read nonetheless.
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Celebrity Report: Elton John's a Luddite
Celebrity Report: I like Elton John's music, but this CNET stories shows him to be just a bit bonkers when it comes to technology. Then again, he was around in the '60's.
Intel Owes AMD $60 Billion?
Here's a fascinating looking into the seamier side of antitrust law (if antitrust could possibly have a seamier side). Basically, this CNET article alleges (or just states, one can't quite tell) that AMD has hired a consultant to show how much money Intel has essentially "stolen" from AMD through anti-competitive practices.
This is, of course, essentially the same as the Microsoft case, without the dubious economics. You have a competitor in AMD (among others) who simply haven't made the best product and marketing decisions, while Intel has done pretty well. In fact, there was a recent period of time when Intel was doing everything wrong, and AMD simply failed to capitalize on it.
Antitrust law is just a way for disgruntled competitors to stop successful companies. I refer you to this article at the Ayn Rand Institute for more.
This is, of course, essentially the same as the Microsoft case, without the dubious economics. You have a competitor in AMD (among others) who simply haven't made the best product and marketing decisions, while Intel has done pretty well. In fact, there was a recent period of time when Intel was doing everything wrong, and AMD simply failed to capitalize on it.
Antitrust law is just a way for disgruntled competitors to stop successful companies. I refer you to this article at the Ayn Rand Institute for more.
2008 BMW 535i Is a Beauty
I have a bad tendency to lust after things I can't have. The 2008 BMW 535i is a good example.
CNET reviews it, and it sounds like heaven on wheels.
CNET reviews it, and it sounds like heaven on wheels.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 4345 Diggs, is a rather plaintive request for Digg to do something about a group that games Digg to, I guess, drive traffic to their site. I suppose that's a real issue, and also seems an inherent issue of Digg itself (because, of course, special interest groups can do this as well, for, say, political purposes).
Mob rule. Gotta love it.
Mob rule. Gotta love it.
Boing Boing Misinterprets Freedom of Speech
In this Boing Boing post, they go postal on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's (CBC's) decision to require employees to get permission to blog if they identify themselves on their blogs as CBC employees. To Boing Boing, this is the epitome of infringement on free speech.
To anyone who understands free speech, however, this is basically saying, "If you want to remain an employee of CBC, then you'll either blog without mentioning that you're a CBC employee (thus avoiding any chance that your opinions will be taken as ours), or you'll get permission first."
Every CBC employee has a right to blog. They just don't have a right to a job at the CBC. The CBC can't stop someone from blogging, the most they can do is stop someone from working at the CBC. Only government could actually, physically stop someone from blogging, and that's what freedom of speech is all about.
To anyone who understands free speech, however, this is basically saying, "If you want to remain an employee of CBC, then you'll either blog without mentioning that you're a CBC employee (thus avoiding any chance that your opinions will be taken as ours), or you'll get permission first."
Every CBC employee has a right to blog. They just don't have a right to a job at the CBC. The CBC can't stop someone from blogging, the most they can do is stop someone from working at the CBC. Only government could actually, physically stop someone from blogging, and that's what freedom of speech is all about.
Boing Boing Advocates News be Created by Special Interest Groups
From what I can tell, this Boing Boing post proposes that "citizen journalism" will be better than "real" journalism. But, what they describe sounds to me a bit like the creation of a sort of partisan journalism, turning all of the "news" into opinion pieces.
Imagine if the only news we received was essentially editorials created by special interest groups. It's really quite chilling.
Imagine if the only news we received was essentially editorials created by special interest groups. It's really quite chilling.
Secure You're Wireless Network (Will be Obvious to Some)
Just a quick public service announcement: if you're wireless network isn't secure or you spend time on unsecured public networks, and if you're not using encrypted connections to your email provider, you're juts asking for trouble.
It's trivial for someone to get all the information they need to make your life a living hell. I once had someone hack into my PayPal account (because I was an idiot and used a weak password for both my Yahoo! email account and for PayPal), change the information on my bank and credit card accounts, and in general hijack my identity. I acted quickly enough--or should I say, PayPal acted quickly enough by calling me about a suspicious transaction--that nothing really bad happened, but I spent the next few weeks closing and opening all sorts of accounts.
So, get that security thing going, eh? My apologies if I sound preachy.
It's trivial for someone to get all the information they need to make your life a living hell. I once had someone hack into my PayPal account (because I was an idiot and used a weak password for both my Yahoo! email account and for PayPal), change the information on my bank and credit card accounts, and in general hijack my identity. I acted quickly enough--or should I say, PayPal acted quickly enough by calling me about a suspicious transaction--that nothing really bad happened, but I spent the next few weeks closing and opening all sorts of accounts.
So, get that security thing going, eh? My apologies if I sound preachy.
Congress Introduces Bill to Allow Governments to Compete in the Broadband Market
This would be bad news: via Ars Technica, it appears that Congress has introduced a bill that would overrule state laws that prohibit munipal broadband. Essentially, it would allow cities and towns to build their own broadband networks in competition with private providers.
Now, government has no special intelligence when it comes to providing such services. In fact, it really knows very little about it, as evidenced by the millions of dollars wasted every year by incompetent government IT departments.
It also has no money to spend on such ventures, other than the taxpayer money that it expropriates from its citizens. This means that government would necessarily be taking money from some group of citizens who either already have their own broadband connections or could care less about it, to provide broadband services to those who, for whatever reason, don't have it. And, of course, there's also the issue of those who current pay for broadband services with private companies to cancel and take advantage of the government-subsidized service.
Finally, government is by definition that entity that possesses a monopoly on the legal use of force; in one sense, government is force, because all of its legitimate functions (police, courts, military, etc.) are aimed at retaliating against those who initiate the use of force. Introducing force into the market does not create "competition," it creates coercion, no matter how the bill might be written. Government corruption stems from its ability to influence lives and business; we don't need more opportunities for it.
In other words, there's no good reason for municipalities to setup broadband services, and plenty of bad reasons. And I haven't even touched upon the economic impact that forcing broadband connectivity with current technologies will have on the development of new technology.
I hope to hell that this bill doesn't pass. Incidentally, it's the Community Broadband Act of 2007, if you feel inclined to contact your Congressperson.
Now, government has no special intelligence when it comes to providing such services. In fact, it really knows very little about it, as evidenced by the millions of dollars wasted every year by incompetent government IT departments.
It also has no money to spend on such ventures, other than the taxpayer money that it expropriates from its citizens. This means that government would necessarily be taking money from some group of citizens who either already have their own broadband connections or could care less about it, to provide broadband services to those who, for whatever reason, don't have it. And, of course, there's also the issue of those who current pay for broadband services with private companies to cancel and take advantage of the government-subsidized service.
Finally, government is by definition that entity that possesses a monopoly on the legal use of force; in one sense, government is force, because all of its legitimate functions (police, courts, military, etc.) are aimed at retaliating against those who initiate the use of force. Introducing force into the market does not create "competition," it creates coercion, no matter how the bill might be written. Government corruption stems from its ability to influence lives and business; we don't need more opportunities for it.
In other words, there's no good reason for municipalities to setup broadband services, and plenty of bad reasons. And I haven't even touched upon the economic impact that forcing broadband connectivity with current technologies will have on the development of new technology.
I hope to hell that this bill doesn't pass. Incidentally, it's the Community Broadband Act of 2007, if you feel inclined to contact your Congressperson.
Ahmadinejad States the Obvious
Iranian President Imajihadi (or whatever his name is) spells out American foreign policy in this story in The International News (sorry, link is to a print-ready page). It's remarkable how precisely he defines it, given how obvious it is. I say, the fact that he brings it up at all means it bugs him, but I doubt that it bugs him all that much, since he's insane.
I link to the story, but really, it's not worth the time.
I link to the story, but really, it's not worth the time.
Friday, August 03, 2007
The Objective Standard on US-Iran Negotiations
More good stuff from the Objective Standard, this time on the recent "negotiations" (cough, appeasements, cough) between the US and Iran. Obviously, the post supposes that Iran is the winner, and of course that's true.
They say it better than I could, so go read it already.
They say it better than I could, so go read it already.
Chicago Overrun by Loony Left
The "Yearly Kos Convention," currently being hosted in Chicago, is probably the only reason I can think of in recent memory of why I'm happy I moved from there to Los Angeles. Of course, they'll probably host in LA next year, in which case I suppose I'll have to go on a vacation or something.
Russia Sells Some Serious Stuff to Iran
Recent significant Russian arms sales (including 250 advanced Su-30 fighters) to Iran does put a bit of a different spin on our arms sales to Saudi Arabia. At least, it does so in a purely contemporary pragmatic sense.
Really, what it says is that we should hurry up and build our ground and air bases in Iraq and Afghanistan and start stocking them up. And the $20 billion should have gone straigh to Israel. Thinking that we can trust Saudi Arabia (or any other Arab state, for that matter), with protecting our interests in the Middle East is the kind of thinking that go us where we are today.
We need to stop with the subtle geopolitical wrangling and start acting like the superpower we are. If that means being really, really nice to our allies and really, really mean to our enemies, than so be it. First, of course, we have to identify which is which, and so far, we've done a poor job of it.
Iran's going to be our problem. Saudi Arabia won't do anything for us. And unfortunately, the Russians and Iranians both know this better than do we.
Really, what it says is that we should hurry up and build our ground and air bases in Iraq and Afghanistan and start stocking them up. And the $20 billion should have gone straigh to Israel. Thinking that we can trust Saudi Arabia (or any other Arab state, for that matter), with protecting our interests in the Middle East is the kind of thinking that go us where we are today.
We need to stop with the subtle geopolitical wrangling and start acting like the superpower we are. If that means being really, really nice to our allies and really, really mean to our enemies, than so be it. First, of course, we have to identify which is which, and so far, we've done a poor job of it.
Iran's going to be our problem. Saudi Arabia won't do anything for us. And unfortunately, the Russians and Iranians both know this better than do we.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at a hefty 7802 Diggs, is a screenshot of Digg from the '90's. Looking at the Dugg titles listed, the only thing that's changed is Digg's gotten a whole lot prettier and more complex.
As they say, the more things change...
As they say, the more things change...
Russia Plants Flag at North Pole
Well, they've gone and done it. Russia has planted a flag on the sea floor at the North Pole. It has no legal standing, of course, any more than the American flag planted on the Moon means that we own it. But to Russia, it's more than just symbolism.
The only economic strength that Russia has is its energy resources. It will do anything it can to exploit them, and to grow them. And so I expect some serious wrangling over this territory, and I don't expect it to be pretty.
The only economic strength that Russia has is its energy resources. It will do anything it can to exploit them, and to grow them. And so I expect some serious wrangling over this territory, and I don't expect it to be pretty.
A Little Bit about Preemption
Here's an interesting post at The Sophistry blog about the issue of preemption. It raises some interesting points, not all of which I agree with, and is in general an interesting read. Of course, I'm all for preemptive strikes against our enemies, and agree with elements of the linked discussion that the concept of "preemption" has a pretty broad timeline.
I won't toss in more examples, because the linked post provides a few. Give it a read.
I won't toss in more examples, because the linked post provides a few. Give it a read.
Newsflash: Young Russians Agree with Putin
Apparently, according to the Washington Post, young Russians consider America their number one threat, just as does Putin. Surprise, surprise.
This quote is interesting:
And while Putin's rhetoric is driving this development, human rights violations associated with U.S. counterterrorism policies have played a role.
Now, this seems a little redundant to me, since Putin controls the media with a pretty tight fist and thus "Putin's rhetoric" and "human rights violations associated with U.S. counterterrorism policies" are really one and the same. Certainly, these same youngsters wouldn't be familiar with Russian counterterrorism policies, and would thus have nothing to compare against.
At times, I think this is all just political posturing, by a nation (Russia) that has long held a collective sense of inferiority. Then again, at other times, I think that things are going to come to a head sometime in the future, and where the Cold War stayed cold (or I wouldn't be writing this), the next one might not be so cool.
This quote is interesting:
And while Putin's rhetoric is driving this development, human rights violations associated with U.S. counterterrorism policies have played a role.
Now, this seems a little redundant to me, since Putin controls the media with a pretty tight fist and thus "Putin's rhetoric" and "human rights violations associated with U.S. counterterrorism policies" are really one and the same. Certainly, these same youngsters wouldn't be familiar with Russian counterterrorism policies, and would thus have nothing to compare against.
At times, I think this is all just political posturing, by a nation (Russia) that has long held a collective sense of inferiority. Then again, at other times, I think that things are going to come to a head sometime in the future, and where the Cold War stayed cold (or I wouldn't be writing this), the next one might not be so cool.
al Qaeda Planning "Big Surprise"?
Some stuff about a potential al Qaeda attack in the next 90 days. I don't normally publish such scaremongering, but for some reason this post caught my eye. And I do put more stock in Israeli intelligence than, well, I suppose, in our own. Even ex-Israeli intelligence. And then there's the bit about August 22nd being an auspicious date in the Muslim calendar.
I could say, we've heard this all before, but then again, we'd heard it all before 9/11, as well. We just weren't listening. So maybe it's a good idea to keep at least one ear open.
Just in case.
I could say, we've heard this all before, but then again, we'd heard it all before 9/11, as well. We just weren't listening. So maybe it's a good idea to keep at least one ear open.
Just in case.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Obama: We'll Never Use Nukes
Via Little Green Footballs: Obama puts his foot in his mouth about the potential use of nuclear weapons. It does tend to raise the question of how viable our nuclear deterrent would be should he be elected President.
Celebrity Report: Chavez and Sean Penn New Best Buds
Celebrity Report: Sean Penn and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez are buds, it would seem. They share, at the very least, a common lack of support for the war in Iraq and, I would guess, a common hatred for America, as well.
The gist:
Chavez said Penn traveled to Venezuela this week wanting to learn more about the situation in the country and walked around some of Caracas' poor barrios on his own.
"Welcome to Venezuela, Mr. Penn. What drives him is consciousness, the search for new paths," Chavez said Wednesday in a televised speech. "He's one of the greatest opponents of the Iraq invasion."
The gist:
Chavez said Penn traveled to Venezuela this week wanting to learn more about the situation in the country and walked around some of Caracas' poor barrios on his own.
"Welcome to Venezuela, Mr. Penn. What drives him is consciousness, the search for new paths," Chavez said Wednesday in a televised speech. "He's one of the greatest opponents of the Iraq invasion."
Boing Boing Fails to Recognize Value of Symbolism
Boing Boing fails utterly to understand the importance of symbolism in maintaining public awareness and support of the war on Islamic totalitarianism. The State of Oklahoma obviously understands its value, and is issuing a license plate reminding everyone that, yes, 9/11 really did happen and, yes, there's still some paying back to be done.
And, by the way, Boing Boing, Osama bin Ladin is really pretty irrelevant in the whole scheme of things. Yes, it would be nice to find him and hang him by the neck, but other than a symbol, he's pretty meaningless. It's Iran, Syria, and Saudia Arabia that are the real problems.
And, by the way, Boing Boing, Osama bin Ladin is really pretty irrelevant in the whole scheme of things. Yes, it would be nice to find him and hang him by the neck, but other than a symbol, he's pretty meaningless. It's Iran, Syria, and Saudia Arabia that are the real problems.
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 3799 Diggs, is a link to a story about the tragic bridge collapse in Minneapolis.
My condolences to everyone who was injured or has lost a loved one in this horrific accident.
My condolences to everyone who was injured or has lost a loved one in this horrific accident.
Poll: Almost 60% Of Iranians Would Welcome Foreign Military Action Against Ahmadinejad
I don't know much about the organization Center For the Promotion of Democracy and Human Rights, but they've just released a fascinating poll taken of the Iranian population. Some excerpts:
A new survey reveals that 92 percent of the subjects of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's totalitarian government do not believe their nation's role is positive, and two-thirds would support a "Velvet Revolution" to remove him from power.
That's interesting enough. Now check this out:
The survey...found that almost six out of 10 Iranians would support a foreign military action for the purpose of taking Ahmadinejad out of the role as dictator.
I don't remember: did we have such a poll before we invaded Iraq?
There's a lot more there. Definitely worth a read, but like all polls, should be taken with a huge grain of salt.
A new survey reveals that 92 percent of the subjects of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's totalitarian government do not believe their nation's role is positive, and two-thirds would support a "Velvet Revolution" to remove him from power.
That's interesting enough. Now check this out:
The survey...found that almost six out of 10 Iranians would support a foreign military action for the purpose of taking Ahmadinejad out of the role as dictator.
I don't remember: did we have such a poll before we invaded Iraq?
There's a lot more there. Definitely worth a read, but like all polls, should be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Putin Youth - An Inside View?
More on the Putin Youth. I'm not terribly sure of this source, and so I'm not putting too much stock in it. But it certainly fits in with everything else we've been hearing.
Litvinenko's Killer - Next Russian President?
Here's an interesting essay that suggests the possibility of Andrei Lugovoi, alleged assassin of Alexander Litvinenko, succeeding Putin as Russian President. It's a bit tongue-in-cheek, I think, but it raises some very interesting points about how Russians perceive themselves and the world.
Quite honestly, something like this wouldn't suprise me.
Quite honestly, something like this wouldn't suprise me.
Software Can Tell if Digital Photo or Video was Altered
This is good news. Neal Krawetz, computer security consultant and researcher, has developed software that can tell if and how a digital photo or video was altered. Given the many, many propaganda pieces that have been foisted on the world by al Qaeda's internal media production team (which apparently they actually have, to no real surprise), this is very useful software indeed.
It's also interesting for many other uses as well. Mainstream media, you better pay attention.
It's also interesting for many other uses as well. Mainstream media, you better pay attention.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Digg Report
Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at 4354 Diggs, is a sort of public service announcement regarding a certain site and Google's search engine.
Quite a few Diggs for not a lot.
Quite a few Diggs for not a lot.
More on Ahmadinejad
A nice piece on Iranian President Imajihadi (or whatever his name is). The guy's on a tear: executions, interference with neighboring countries, exporting terrorism, forging relationships with every dictator he can. I only wish I had the same sort of energy.
It's a quick read, and worth it.
It's a quick read, and worth it.
Russian's Claim on the North Pole to Cause Serious Problems
I'm linking to this post only because of the bizarre headline: "Future War: Russia vs Canada vs Denmark." It's comical, put that way.
Of course, the dispute over energy resources in the North Pole won't be so comical in the future, I'm afraid. Obviously, Canada and Denmark would never go against the Russians on their own. Should things come to a shooting war, the US would be hip deep in it.
Of course, the dispute over energy resources in the North Pole won't be so comical in the future, I'm afraid. Obviously, Canada and Denmark would never go against the Russians on their own. Should things come to a shooting war, the US would be hip deep in it.
Russia and China: BFF
It's amazing how quickly relationships between nations can change. Consider that just a few short decades ago, China and Russia were not the best of friends, sharing such a large border and in spite of their both being Communist nations. Now, they're working together on huge, mainly energy-related projects, and they're even holding joint military exercises.
Geopolitics is a fascinating subject.
Geopolitics is a fascinating subject.
Yahoo! Knew More When it Handed Over the Info?
One could take the attitude "When in Rome..." regarding the Yahoo! controversy over information provided to the Chinese government that resulted in a Chinese dissident being put in jail. In fact, that would have to be the Left's multiculturalist view--who are we Americans to define how another country should run itself?
Or, one could take the attitude that it's an evil thing, but it's justified by Yahoo!'s presence in China, which will inevitably help that nation turn to freedom via access to better information. This position's a little weak, for many reasons, not the least of which is that I'm sure Yahoo! censors its search results and other information based on the direction of the Chinese government. So, it's probably not doing much good even in this regard.
Finally, there's the mere fact that Yahoo! really has little choice in what it does, as long as it's doing business there. Would Yahoo! have been able to refuse to hand over the information? I doubt it. I have a feeling the Chinese government would have gotten their hands on the information one way or another.
That leaves pretty much the only option that Yahoo! should refrain from doing business in China. So far, thought, it's owners (that is, is shareholders) haven't decided to do so. Maybe enough of these sorts of events will change their minds.
Or, one could take the attitude that it's an evil thing, but it's justified by Yahoo!'s presence in China, which will inevitably help that nation turn to freedom via access to better information. This position's a little weak, for many reasons, not the least of which is that I'm sure Yahoo! censors its search results and other information based on the direction of the Chinese government. So, it's probably not doing much good even in this regard.
Finally, there's the mere fact that Yahoo! really has little choice in what it does, as long as it's doing business there. Would Yahoo! have been able to refuse to hand over the information? I doubt it. I have a feeling the Chinese government would have gotten their hands on the information one way or another.
That leaves pretty much the only option that Yahoo! should refrain from doing business in China. So far, thought, it's owners (that is, is shareholders) haven't decided to do so. Maybe enough of these sorts of events will change their minds.
Jewish-Muslim Relationship Complex - (Today's "Duh" Post)
I don't really know that much about the history of Jewish-Muslim relations prior to the 20th Century. I probably should.
This essay seems reasonable, but of course it's only one essay and I don't know enough to say whether or not it's valid. I'll have to find some others.
This essay seems reasonable, but of course it's only one essay and I don't know enough to say whether or not it's valid. I'll have to find some others.
Democrats to Tax the Heck Out of Us
The interesting thing about this post at Pundit Review is that it points out how utterly ignorant the Democrats really are about economics. Each one of the tax increases listed would have a direct negative effect on precisely what's been keeping the economy afloat these past years: investment and production.
Also, read the part about how taxes have risen in proportion to GDP while the deficit has fallen. I'm not a fan of taxes, but understanding basic economic principles would be a nice thing for our leaders to possess.
Also, read the part about how taxes have risen in proportion to GDP while the deficit has fallen. I'm not a fan of taxes, but understanding basic economic principles would be a nice thing for our leaders to possess.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
US to Sell Arms to Saudi Arabia (?!?)
Okay, let me get this straight: of the 60 to 80 terrorists streaming into Iraq, perhaps as many as 50% are from Saudi Arabia, who continues to do, really, very little about it. And yet, we're going to sell them arms, as a foil against Iran, who probably provides most of the rest of the terrorists.
And one wonders why we can't make any traction is stamping out terrorism and Islamic extremism.
And one wonders why we can't make any traction is stamping out terrorism and Islamic extremism.
Good Anti-Ahmadinejad Site
Just wanted to provide a link to an anti-Imajihadi (or whatever his name is), in case you're into that sort of thing. Which you should be. It's:
StopAhmadinejad
StopAhmadinejad
Another in a Long List of Stories about America's Military Planning
I hate it when military preparations are broadcast on international news--by American media. It's not proposing censorship that they show a little restraint.
For example, here's a story about B-2 bombers being retrofitted to carry bunker buster bombs. They'd work great, especially on sites like Iran's nuclear facilities.
That's why the headline of the story, "Is Iran Busted?" bothers me so much. Not only are the preparations spelled out, but a direct link to Iran is drawn quite clearly by the story. Ironically, the story goes on to spell out some very specific (and surprising) reasons why attacking Iran would be justified and prudent. To quote:
Iran has so far ignored pleas that it suspend nuclear development. It has also flouted two sets of international sanctions intended to make Iran's government comply with United Nations resolutions requesting it to shut down its program.
Iran is clearly linked to terrorists in the Middle East who are killing innocent civilians and U.S. troops in Iraq.
Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini declared war on America in 1979 after Islamist students stormed the U.S. embassy and took hostages.
Tehran has threatened the existence of Israel, a nation that poses no danger to Iran, accords equal rights to its Arab citizens and, until recently, had the only freely elected government in the Middle East.
Iran supports the terrorist groups Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which produce an unhealthy instability in the region.
Now, imagine the world with a nuclear-armed Iran.
That just about sums it up. Just hush up a bit about US military planning, would you?
For example, here's a story about B-2 bombers being retrofitted to carry bunker buster bombs. They'd work great, especially on sites like Iran's nuclear facilities.
That's why the headline of the story, "Is Iran Busted?" bothers me so much. Not only are the preparations spelled out, but a direct link to Iran is drawn quite clearly by the story. Ironically, the story goes on to spell out some very specific (and surprising) reasons why attacking Iran would be justified and prudent. To quote:
Iran has so far ignored pleas that it suspend nuclear development. It has also flouted two sets of international sanctions intended to make Iran's government comply with United Nations resolutions requesting it to shut down its program.
Iran is clearly linked to terrorists in the Middle East who are killing innocent civilians and U.S. troops in Iraq.
Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini declared war on America in 1979 after Islamist students stormed the U.S. embassy and took hostages.
Tehran has threatened the existence of Israel, a nation that poses no danger to Iran, accords equal rights to its Arab citizens and, until recently, had the only freely elected government in the Middle East.
Iran supports the terrorist groups Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which produce an unhealthy instability in the region.
Now, imagine the world with a nuclear-armed Iran.
That just about sums it up. Just hush up a bit about US military planning, would you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
