slenderdog

Chavez Warns of War With Colombia - Topix

2008-03-05T04:29:00.000-08:00

Chavez Warns of War With Colombia - Topix

Venezuela and Ecuador sought Monday to make Colombia pay a high price for killing a leftist rebel leader in the Ecuadorean jungle - expelling its diplomats, ordering troops to the border and cracking down on trade across the border.

Proxy war. The United States funds Colombia, Chavez funds FARC. Venezuela and the United States are, of course, great friends thanks to the oil business--so they settle their differences indirectly.

Exxon wins court order freezing sale of billions in oil assets by Venezuela

2008-02-09T06:46:00.001-08:00

Exxon Mobil has won court orders freezing as much as $12 billion in petroleum assets controlled by Venezuela's government in an escalation of a dispute over efforts by President Hugo Chávez to assert greater control over the country's oil industry.

Venezuela's dollar-denominated bonds suffered their steepest drop in six months on Thursday on concerns that Chávez's government could face a protracted legal battle with Exxon, preventing the government from raising cash through the sale of refineries abroad if the economy here slows after years of torrid growth...

In recent days, Exxon won a court order from the High Court of

London prohibiting Petróleos de Venezuela from selling assets worldwide

up to a value of $12 billion, Margaret Ross, an Exxon spokeswoman in

Houston, said in a statement. Exxon won similar orders in the

Netherlands and the Netherlands Antilles for assets worth up to $12

billion.

And in New York, Exxon won an order freezing $300

million of Petróleos de Venezuela's assets. Despite a deterioration of

political relations between Caracas and Washington, Venezuela remains a

major trading partner with the United States, ranking as its

fourth-largest supplier of imported crude oil.

Source: iht.com via slenderdog

Last year the Venezuelan government took over the Orinoco Belt oil project, of which Exxon owned 41.7%. In September 2007, after failing to reach agreement with Venezuela on compensation for their stake in the project, Exxon took the case to the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, an arbitration body associated with the World Bank.

"Exxon Mobil has worked with the Venezuelan government to reach an agreement regarding compensation based on the fair market value of the assets," company spokesman Len D'Eramo said.

"We are disappointed these discussions have not been successful."

Source: news.bbc.co.uk via slenderdog

While it might make sense to an adolescent ideologue to confiscate assets to redistribute wealth to the poor, the the real effect of such nonsense is negative.

Not only has Chavez discouraged investment in Venezuela and its oil industry (who would risk investing there now?) but his "redistribution" policies are starving Petroleos de Venezuela (the state-owned oil company) of capital:

PDVSA

is already facing growing debt and increasing operational problems that

analysts attribute to underinvestment caused by the company's massive

contributions to Chavez's social programs.

Source: ca.news.yahoo.com via slenderdog

Social development in PDVSA is a process of formulating and executing projects in alignment with the Community Development plans of the State. In order to put oil resources to the service of the wider population and create a new economic model, putting an end to the social inequalities so apparent in Venezuela in the last decades, PDVSA promotes Fondespa (The Fund for Social and Economic Development within the Country), which has the task of promoting social development through a transparent and fair distribution of oil revenues.

Backing the social missions promoted by the National Executive is one of the ways in which PDVSA gets directly involved in the lives of ordinary Venezuelans. The company, as part of its revolutionary, corporate responsibility program, encourages groups to take part in their own development projects by first considering the specific conditions (cultural, productive, etc) of each region in the country. By doing so, the corporation acknowledges and respects the constitutive plurality of Venezuelan society. That is how the Endogenous Development Nuclei (Núcleos de Desarrollo Endógeno or NDE) are established, allowing each community to become aware of its potential and is also capable of strengthening and transforming itself so as to generate benefits for the community and eventually become self-supporting.

PDVSA is 100% committed to the eradication of both rural and urban poverty. The company promotes an extensive network of endogenous development projects throughout the country. It also actively discourages every kind of discrimination and is dedicated to supporting minority groups within Venezuela, through a wide range of different programs.

The social programs organized by PDVSA:

    * Offer the means, possibilities, and real resources to enable citizens to improve conditions in personal, social, cultural and professional aspects of their own lives. This is carried out in a way that educates individuals to develop a communitarian consciousness, whilst upgrading their skills and allowing them a greater participation in the economic, political, and social life of the country.

    * Establish the strategies and programs that conform to the regulations of the National Executive and PDVSA, and enable information, resources, assets and document exchanges between PDVSA and other sources of social development that contribute to satisfying community requirements and expectations.

    * Align and communicate, together with PDVSA’s main organizations social and economic programs; guaranteeing an improved coexistence and greater understanding between PDVSA and the communities it serves.

Source: pdvsa.com via slenderdog

We suspect that Chavez has little grasp of the fact that wealth is accumulated over time through investment in productive activity. An ordinary business grows and prospers through accumulation of profit and reinvestment in itself. Many businesses engage in community investment in recognition of the benefits and of their social responsibility. But PDVSA is engaged in a much broader project: "the eradication of both rural and urban poverty." The "endogenous development" program seems as much ideologically led social engineering as investment. Such efforts would seem to be beyond the means of any business, even a national oil monopoly, and especially one bound by a discredited ideology that has led to the freezing of its assets.

If Chavez had a grasp of reality he would understand that by cooperating with foreign investors he could preserve Venezuela's credit, keep PDVSA profitable and healthy, and free up more capital to reinvest in his social programs (whatever they may accomplish). But he seems to prefer his class warrior status to the actual achievement of his stated goals.

The Potential for Danger in Particle Collider Experiments

2008-02-07T04:55:00.001-08:00

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a gigantic scientific instrument near Geneva, where it spans the border between Switzerland and France about 100 m underground. It is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles – the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionise our understanding, from the miniscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe.

Two beams of subatomic particles called 'hadrons' – either protons or lead ions – will travel in opposite directions inside the circular accelerator, gaining energy with every lap. Physicists will use the LHC to recreate the conditions just after the Big Bang, by colliding the two beams head-on at very high energy. Teams of physicists from around the world will analyse the particles created in the collisions using special detectors in a number of experiments dedicated to the LHC.

There are many theories as to what will result from these collisions, but what's for sure is that a brave new world of physics will emerge from the new accelerator, as knowledge in particle physics goes on to describe the workings of the Universe. For decades, the Standard Model of particle physics has served physicists well as a means of understanding the fundamental laws of Nature, but it does not tell the whole story. Only experimental data using the higher energies reached by the LHC can push knowledge forward, challenging those who seek confirmation of established knowledge, and those who dare to dream beyond the paradigm.
Source: public.web.cern.ch

While we might acclaim more knowledge as, generally, a good thing, we do have to wonder why we're being told of a "brave new world." Not everyone agrees that the LHC, however useful, is without serious risks:

Summary:

The upcoming Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN could be dangerous. It could produce potentially dangerous particles such as mini black holes, strangelets, and monopoles.

A CERN study indicates no danger for earth, [Ref. 1] but its arguments are incomplete. The reasons why they are incomplete are discussed here.

This paper considers mainly micro black holes (MBHs) with low speeds. The fact that the speed of resultant MBHs would be low is unique to colliders. An important issue is the rate of accretion of matter subsequent to MBH creation.

This study explores processes that could cause accretion to be significant.

Other dangers of the LHC accelerator are also discussed.

I. Arguments for danger in LHC particle accelerator experiments

"In the 27-kilometer-long circular tunnel that held its predecessor, the LHC will be the most powerful particle accelerator in the world. It will smash fundamental particles into one another at energies like those of the first trillionth of a second after the Big Bang, when the temperature of the Universe was about ten thousand trillion degrees Centigrade." [Ref. 5]

1. There is a high probability that micro black holes (MBHs) will be produced in the LHC. A reasonable estimation of the probability that theories with (4+d) dimensions are valid could be more than 60%. The CERN study indicates in this case a copious production of MBHs at the LHC. [Ref. 1] One MBH could be produced every second. [Ref. 4 & Ref. 5]

2. The CERN study indicates that MBHs present no danger because they will evaporate with Hawking evaporation. [Ref. 1] However, Hawking evaporation has never been tested. In several surveys, physicists have estimated a non trivial probability that Hawking evaporation will not work. [Ref. 9] My estimate of its risk of Hawking evaporation failure is 20%, or perhaps as much as 30%.

The following points assume MBH production, and they assume that Hawking evaporation will fail.

3. The cosmic ray model is not valid for the LHC. It has been said that cosmic rays, which have more energy than the LHC, show that there is no danger. This may be true for accelerators that shoot high energy particles at a zero speed target. This is similar to cosmic ray shock on the moon's surface. In these cases the center of mass of interaction retains a high speed. This is different from the situation at the LHC, where particles with opposing speeds collide. With cosmic rays (mainly protons in cosmic rays) we need a speed of 0.9999995 c to create a micro black hole of 1 TeV and after the interaction the micro black hole center of mass will have a speed of 0.999 c. As MBHs are not very reactive with matter, calculations indicate that this is more than enough velocity to cross planets or stars without being caught and to escape into space.

4. Lower speed MBHs created in colliders could be captured by earth. Using Greg Landsberg's calculation [Ref. 3] of one black hole with velocity less than escape velocity from earth produced every 10^5 seconds at the LHC, we have 3.160 (US notation 3,160) MBHs captured by earth in ten years. More precise calculations show that we could have a distribution of MBHs at every range of speed from 0 m/sec to 4 m/sec. The probability of very low speed MBHs is not zero. We need to evaluate if low speed MBHs present more risks.

5. The speed of a MBH captured by earth will decrease and at the end MBHs will come to rest in the center of earth. The speed will decrease because of accretion and interaction with matter.

If we consider that:

a. The CERN study's calculus for accretion uses the "Schwarzschild radius" for the accretion cross section. [Ref. 1] In the case of low speeds, we must not use the Schwarzschild radius for the calculus of accretion. There are several reasons the capture radius extends beyond the Schwarzschild radius. For example, if the MBH speed were zero, gravitational attraction would be active at a distance greater than the Schwarzschild radius.

b. If a MBH accretes an electron, it will acquire a charge and then probably accrete a proton.

c. If a MBH accretes a quark it will then probably accrete a proton. When a quark is caught, the whole nucleon can be expected to be caught because otherwise the black hole would have acquired a charge which is not complete. (For example minus 1/3.) In a nucleus a fractional charge is unstable and is not allowed. This strongly suggests that the MBH will be required to accrete other divided charges to reach a completed integer number of charges. The same process can be expected in regard to quark color.

d. Gauge forces at short distances could also help to capture an atomic nucleus.

Our calculus indicates that a slow speed MBH can be expected to capture 8.400 (US notation 8,400) nucleons every hour, at the beginning of an exponential process.

6. In the center of earth new processes could occur: As stated above, it has been estimated that in ten years 3.160 (US notation 3,160) MBHs could be captured by earth. All MBHs will progressively lose speed because of numerous interactions. After a time (calculations have to be completed to estimate this time) all these MBHs will go toward the precise gravitational center of earth. (Kip Thorne [Ref. 7 p. 111]) After numerous interactions they will stop there at rest and then coalesce into a single MBH. To get an idea and for a first approach our calculus indicates that the mass of this MBH could be on the order of 0.02 g with a radius of 4 x 10^-17 m. At the center of earth, the pressure is 3.6 x 10^11 Pascals. [Ref. 8]. This pressure results from all the matter in Earth pushing on the electronic cloud of central atoms. The move of electrons is responsible of a pressure (called degenerescence pressure) that counterbalance the pressure of all the matter in Earth.

Around a black hole there is not an electronic cloud and there is no degenerescence pressure to counterbalance the pressure of all the Earth matter.To indicate the pressure we must use the surface If in an equation Pressure P = Force F / Surface S if we keep F= Constant and we reduce surface, we are obliged to notice that Pressure P will increase. Here F is the weight of all the matter of Earth and this do not change. As the surface of the MBH will be very small, calculus indicate on this surface an impressive increase of pressure in the range of : P = aprox 7 x 10 ^ 23 Pa .

The high pressure in this region push strongly all the matter in direction of the central point where the MBH is.

Electrons directly in contact with the Micro Black Hole will first be caught, then the nucleus will be caught.

It is sure that the atoms will be caught one after the other but the more the pressure will be important the more the caught will be quick. When a neutron star begins to collapse in a black hole (implosion), at the beginning the black hole is only a micro black hole as we see in [Ref. 7 Page 443]. At this very moment the high gravitational pressure in the center of the neutron star is there breaking the "strong force" which lays between the quarks located into the neutrons.

The MBH will grow there only because of the high pressure.

In center of Earth pressure is normally far to small for such a process, but if we create a slow speed MBH that does not evaporate and if this MBH comes at rest in the center of Earth, the pressure in the center of Earth could be sufficient for the growing of the MBH. We must remember that in the surrounding of the MBH the "strong force" is broken and this could mean that the same kind of pressure process than in neutron star could work there ( in a slow mode compared with a neutron star of course ). In the center of Earth, the high pressure, the high temperature, the increasing mass associated with electrical and gauge forces process could mean important increase of capture and a possible beginning of an exponential dangerous accretion process. Our calculus indicates as a first approximation with a MBH of 0.02 g at rest at the center of earth that the value for accretion of matter could be in the range of 1 g/sec to 5 g/sec.

7. Conclusion about MBHs : We estimate that for LHC the risk in the range of 7% to 10%.

II. Other Risk Factors

The CERN study indicates that strangelets and monopoles could be produced and present no danger for earth. [Ref. 1]

We will present arguments of possible danger.

1. Strangelets

Strangelets are only dangerous for earth if they are not moving rapidly through matter. If only one strangelet is at zero speed there would be danger. We have seen for MBHs that the cosmic ray model is very different from the LHC where particles with opposing speeds collide. We have seen that, given the impact of opposite speed particles, the distribution of speeds of resultant particles indicates the probability of very low speeds (0 m/sec < speed < 4 m/sec) and this could mean dangerous strangelets. We estimate a minimal risk for strangelets on the order of 2%. We might estimate as high as 10 % if we want to be wise because the danger is primary!

2. Monopoles

Monopoles could be produced in the LHC. [Ref. 1] .CERN's calculations indicate that one monopole produced in LHC could destroy 1.018 (US notation 1,018) nucleons but it will quickly traverse the earth and escape into space. However, we know that photons produced in the center of the sun need thousands of years to traverse the sun and escape into space because of the numerous interactions. If the speed given to the monopole after interaction is a speed in a random direction, we can imagine that the monopoles produced in the LHC could stay a very long time in earth and be dangerous. 3. Estimate of danger due to our ignorance of ultimate physical laws: We have not exhausted processes that might cause danger. There are other particles, black energy, black mass, quintessence, vacuum energy, and many non definitive theories. We estimate this danger ranging from a minimal 2% risk to 5%.

III. CONCLUSION

The CERN study [Ref. 1] is a remake of a similar study for the earlier Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven (RHIC) [Ref. 6] adapted to the LHC.

It is important to notice that: The study for the RHIC had concluded that no black holes will be created. For the LHC the conclusion is very different: "Black holes could be created!" !

The main danger could be now just behind our door with the possible death in blood of 6.500.000.000 (US notation 6,500,000,000) people and complete destruction of our beautiful planet. Such a danger shows the need of a far larger study before any experiment ! The CERN study presents risk as a choice between a 100% risk or a 0% risk. This is not a good evaluation of a risk percentage!

If we add all the risks for the LHC we could estimate an overall risk between 11% and 25%!.

We are far from the Adrian Kent's admonition that global risks that should not exceed 0.000001% a year to have a chance to be acceptable. [Ref. 3] .Even testing the LHC could be dangerous. Even an increase in the luminosity of the RHIC could be dangerous! It would be wise to consider that the more powerful the accelerator will be, the more unpredicted and dangerous the events that may occur! We cannot build accelerators always more powerful with interactions different from natural interactions, without risk. This is not a scientific problem. This is a wisdom problem!

Our desire of knowledge is important but our desire of wisdom is more important and must take precedence. The precautionary principle indicates not to experiment. The politicians must understand this evidence and stop these experiments before it is too late!

-----------------------------------------------------------------

References:

1.. Study of potentially dangerous events during heavy-ion collisions at the LHC: Report of the LHC Safety Study Group. CERN 2003-001. February 28, 2003.

2.. E-mail exchange between Greg Landsberg and James Blodgett, March 2003, http://www.risk-evaluation-forum.org. (No longer posted. Request a copy. Risk Evaluation Forum, BOX 2371, Albany, NY 12220 0371 USA.)

3.. A critical look at risk assessment for global catastrophes, Adrian Kent, CERN-TH 2000-029 DAMTP-2000-105. Revised April 2003. hep-ph/0009204. Available at: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/000....

4.. High energy colliders as black hole factories: the end of short distance physics, Steven B. Giddings, Scott Thomas. Phys Rev D65 (2002) 056010.

5.. CERN to spew black holes, Nature October 2, 2001.

6.. Review of speculative disaster scenarios at RHIC September 28, 1999 W.Busza, R.L. Jaffe, J.Sandweiss and F.Wilczek.

7.. Trous noirs et distorsions du temps, Kip S. Thorne, Flammarion 1997. ISBN 2-08-0811463-X. Original title: Black holes and times warps. 1994 Norton. New York.

8.. Centre de la Terre, Science & Vie N 1042. Gallate 2004.

9.. Results of several Delphi groups and physicist questionnaires, James Blodgett, Risk Evaluation Forum, forthcoming.

Source: risk-evaluation-forum.org

We believe that sooner or later some damn fool is going to do something really stupid and kill thousands, millions, maybe billions of innocent people in the name of science. Why not now?

It isn't that we don't believe that scientific knowledge is worth pursuing. It's that we don't trust people who say "trust us," especially if they're experimenting.

More Clinton Race Politics

2008-02-06T14:14:00.001-08:00

From a reddit discussion about Obama v. Clinton:

If Hillary Clinton is named the Democratic nominee, remember, she did it by attacking the rights of black people to vote in Presidential primaries.
Look for a massive push by Hillary Clinton's camp to "reseat" delegates from Michigan and Florida, which were taken away by the DNC previously.

Florida is probably similar, but I'm in Michigan, and I can tell what I feel is happening here.

Michigan is home to Detroit, which has about 900k people, 700k-ish of which are African American, in a state of about 10M people.

Some months ago, it was clear that Obama was Clinton's #1 competitor. If he was even marginally successful, Detroit's vote, along with other cities with large/majority African American populations, such as Flint or Grand Rapids, would give Obama an easy victory in Michigan, and despite our losses, we're still a top 10 state.

So, our Governor Jennifer Granholm, who endorses Hillary Clinton, agreed to hold an early primary (Jan 15, 2008), probably knowing that Hillary Clinton's friends within the DNC would then cut our votes out of the Democratic Nomination, eliminating this advantage for Obama and giving Clinton the edge she needs. Michigan Republicans, seeing a chance to make the Democrats look bad by ignoring Michigan voters, agreed, and the changes sailed through.

And that's exactly what happened.

Clinton broke her pledge not to campaign here, stayed on the ballot when all of the other democrats pulled out, and won a pointless victory.

Now there is talk that our Governor Granholm is joining the Clinton administration, for all of her "help" in "winning" Michigan.

"help" in suppressing the black vote.

And we can expect Clinton to push hard to make those delegate votes count again. Delegates selected without the favored candidate of the likely majority of Democratic voters.

It's just another way to "keep the black man down"

How sad.

Source: reddit.com

Bill Clinton is as black as Barack. He was the first black President. How do these preposterous myths gain currency? Does anyone doubt the complicity of the Clinton machine? These people are lower than a snake's belly. It's been said so many times, in so many ways: they'll do anything to gain power. One might be tempted to admire the skill and audacity, if not for the damage they have done to the dignity of their country. One could describe either Bill or Hillary in many and colorful ways, but neither of them will never answer to the description to which they ought most highly aspire: public servant.

The Future of Recorded Music?

2008-02-06T13:20:00.001-08:00

The Flashbulb, aka Benn Jordan, became so outraged when he discovered that iTunes was effectively pirating his music, that he uploaded copies of his latest album to BitTorrent. TorrentFreak caught up with Benn to learn more about the decision to stop distributors and ‘coked-up label reps’ from getting all the cash...
TF: Could you tell us more about the support you’re getting from one of the so-called ‘OiNK replacement’ sites, ‘What.cd’ ?

Benn: It was really a fresh breath of air for

What.cd to promote the idea of artists having involvement with their

own torrents. Not only does it benefit the artist to no end, but I

can’t imagine that any court in the world would be able to pin someone

on copyright infringement for a torrent the copyright holder created.

TF: Aside from uploading your own albums, at times you took an anti-piracy stance at OiNK, why the big change of heart?

Benn: I don’t think my stance has changed all that

much. It’d be a great PR move to say that I’m pro-piracy, but I’d be

lying. I keep seeing these internet news stories saying things like

“The Flashbulb Promotes Piracy”. It is totally out of control. How

could I be promoting piracy if I’m uploading my own material with a

“buy it if you like it” message in the torrent?

What I’m promoting is the artist’s freedom to choose what can and

can’t be done with his/her music, and more importantly, the listener’s

freedom to do what he/she wants with their own computer, MP3 player, or

internet connection.

After a journey through miles and miles of bullshit in this

industry, you learn one thing: If you want something done right, you’ve

got to do it yourself. Whether you’re downloading my music to check it

out, to accompany the CD, or even pirating it…I want you to have a

version/rip of it that I’ve listened to and approved of...

Oink was the biggest music library in the world. People didn’t use

it because they were criminals, people used it because it was literally

better than any service you could pay for. It was the stubborn behavior

of the record labels, artists, and government that wouldn’t allow that

music library to have a cash register at the front door.

The thing RIAA is scared of is that their billion dollar backbone

can no longer shelter people from exploring music themselves. Their

business plan had evolved into telling the world what they will want to

listen to and buy, and now they’ll have to actually compete with

talented artists again. As the people regain control of the market,

music will be judged by it’s content again and will be subjected to

it’s own Darwinism. It is a very interesting time for the music

industry…and since my entire life is devoted to making music, bring it

on. I hope that this situation with my new record proves to other

labels and artists that giving people exactly what they
want is the

smartest way to conduct any business.

Source: torrentfreak.com

Benn is living proof that both artists and fans can enjoy music without the intermediation of a record label. Reminds us of the Protestant Reformation.

The market has decided. People will download free music and the artists who provide it will be the ones who prosper. If a recording artist can upload his work to a server, what use is a record label? Game over.

Nano not transport solution for India: Pachauri

2008-02-06T09:14:00.001-08:00

New Delhi: The launch of the Rs1-lakh car was received with scepticism by Dr RK Pachauri, head of the UN body on climate change, which this year shared the Nobel Peace Prize with former US vice-president Al Gore.

“This is not the transport option for the country of a billion people many of whom cannot afford to buy even a bus ticket,’’ said Dr Pachauri...

To a question, he said it would be wrong to think that the Tata car

would be a substitute for two wheelers. It would be just an add-on to

the chaotic traffic conditions.

Dr Pachauri blamed the policy

makers for the increasing road congestion in Indian cities and towns,

and said users of cars should be made to pay for the road space they

were using. Giving the example of central London, he said the

imposition of heavy user charge on those entering that part of the city

had yielded results, so there was no reason that similar measures in

Delhi should fail.

Source: news.indiainfo.com

The manufacturers of the Nano have claimed that emissions from the car will be minimal. But Mr Pachauri's point seems to be that the Tata Nano is not a realistic aspiration for many Indians, who would be better served by public transport.

Perhaps they would be better served by public transport, but the freedom afforded the car owner is a great driver of economic an social progress. Certainly there are social costs, but no amount of investment in public transport or imposition of congestion charges will deter Indians from acquiring cars as soon as they can afford them. The challenge is to learn from the experiences of developed countries, adopting their successes and avoiding their failures. If the Indian authorities view cars as revenue sources, let us hope they invest the proceeds of taxes and charges in improving India's roads, which would bring economic benefits to many.

As to the negative aspects of wider car ownership: we would argue that these are negligible compared to the potential improvements in living standards that could result. It is to be hoped that India will seek to develop sensibly, but it would be foolish to impede the development of the Indian car industry.

Invisible Ink on Ballots?

2008-02-06T03:22:00.001-08:00

Some votes were apparently lost, however, when about 20 folks at a Chicago precinct were given styluses designed for touch-screen machines instead of ink pens. When voters complained the devices made no marks on their paper ballots, a ballot judge told them the markers were full of invisible ink.
"After 20 people experienced the same problem, somebody said 'Wait,

we've got 20 ballots where nobody's voted for anything,'" said Board of

Elections spokesman Jim Allen. Officials were trying to contact the

voters; Allen said the both the voters and the judge believed the

invisible ink theory.

Source: ap.google.com

Well, after all, Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone...

New travel document requirements for USA citizens

2008-02-05T09:34:00.001-08:00

Under new regulations and procedures announced to take effect over the next month, citizens of the USA will, for the first time, be required to obtain USA government permission in order to return home to their own country from abroad -- from anywhere else in the world, by air or sea or land.
On no other aspect of the right to travel is international law more clear than on the right of return to the country of one's own citizenship: "No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country." The new regulations are a flagrant violation of the obligations of the USA as a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other international human rights treaties, as well as a violation of the Constitutional duty of the USA government to treat such treaties as the highest law of the land.

It's to be hoped that some civil liberties or human rights organization or individual will go to court before the end of this month to enjoin the government from putting these rules and procedures into effect, and that citizens will assert their rights by attempting to cross borders without papers, and suing those goons from the USA Department of Homeland Security who try to stop them.

Source: hasbrouck.org

Is the Surge Working?

2008-02-02T09:31:00.001-08:00

Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch has spent years thinking about the war in Iraq, both as a senior strategist in 2005 and now as a division commander. He has seen strategies, missions and buzzwords come and go, but he now believes U.S. commanders finally have a feel for the battlefield...
"The surge gave us the combat power to take the fight to the enemy,"

Lynch said. He cited a Jan. 10 battle in Arab Jabour where U.S. bombers

dropped 40,000 pounds of bombs in 10 minutes to clear an insurgent

stronghold.

U.S. troops have built 50 new bases south of Baghdad where they live

full time instead of commuting from massive bases in western Baghdad as

they had in the past, Lynch said.

"Once you're there, the local citizens come forward and ask two

questions: `Are you gonna stay?' If the answer is yes, they say: `How

can we help?'"

That is how U.S. forces began recruiting local men to help provide security and rebuild towns, Lynch said. Variously known as Awakening Councils,

Concerned Local Citizens or the Sons of Iraq, Lynch said he now has

32,000 Iraqi civilians on his payroll manning 1,500 new checkpoints, in

addition to the more than 20,000 Iraqi soldiers and police under his

control.

He rejected criticism that these groups reinforce sectarian division

or tribal loyalties. He said the groups are based on where they live —

not on their religion or clan — and payments are made directly to

individuals, not tribal leaders.

The military has also adopted a large, aggressive information campaign.

"You can secure the population, but if they do not perceive they are

secure, you have not accomplished your mission. That's where

information operations become so important," Lynch said.

The division produces a glossy, hard-backed coffee table book

full of color photos showing smiling children, helpful U.S. soldiers

and professional Iraqi forces. Lynch said he is also setting up radio

stations and newspapers to complement a national campaign that includes

television commercials showing brave Iraqi civilians overwhelming

brutal insurgents through sheer numbers.

Lynch said while there are still Iraqi political problems at the

national level, at the grass roots there is a growing movement to end

the fighting and get on with life. His division has recorded a 74

percent drop in monthly attacks, an 81 percent drop in civilian

casualties and an 85 percent drop in coalition casualties since May

2007.

He said that the recent progress could still be lost, but that U.S.

commanders finally had a good feel for the battlefield and how to

defeat the insurgency.

"We've always said that the only way we are going to win this counterinsurgency fight in Iraq

is through the people of Iraq," he said. "If they perceive security,

they are going to continue to move in the right direction."

Source: news.yahoo.com

It seems as if the "surge" is reducing casualties and bringing more stability to daily life in Iraq. From this report we might conclude that this is progress. And it is, undeniably, progress of a sort. If you compare the present situation to what went before, yes, progress has been made. But is it progress in the right direction? And does it justify the awful price paid by thousands of Iraqis and Americans who have lost life and limb?

To answer these questions we need to articulate clearly the goals of American occupation of Iraq. Alan Greenspan recently came out and said in his memoirs what no policy maker dares say openly: the invasion of Iraq was undertaken to secure the region's oil resources. There are other strategic concerns but the stability of world energy markets is of compelling interest to American policy makers of both leading political parties, not least because energy stability is directly tied to the world's financial stability. The necessity to secure these resources is heightened by the expected depletion of these resources over the coming century: security of supply could mitigate price instability.

Why this geopolitical reality is never discussed, we can only speculate. It is the failure to adduce clear justification that arouses resistance to the war policy. Americans are not stupid people. Tales of terrorists and bogeymen with weapons of mass destruction in Iraq do not ring true. They cannot be expected to sacrifice sons and daughters to support a clearly dishonest policy.

On the other hand, does preservation of the prevailing world order justify the sacrifice of thousands of lives? Who is qualified to order that sacrifice? Perhaps the moral cowardice of our ruling classes compels the obfuscation of the strategic motives of their military policies. Is it that they lack conviction, or is it that they lack the confidence in their persuasive ability? Or is it that they feel realpolitik is incompatible with the precepts of open society, and must be concealed by rhetorical nods to "democracy" and "security?"

So the surge has made progress in quelling insurgency in Iraq. Has it made progress toward the goals of American occupation? Again, what are those goals? If American troops are in Iraq to secure oil reserves, the answer is a qualified yes. A stable Iraqi regime, even dependent on American military presence, does preserve, for the moment, the security of the oil reserves in Iraq, and affords a regional presence in case it becomes necessary to act in other places. However, true stability is not likely to develop in a climate of dependence on American presence. This creates a vulnerability for American interests in that financial and strategic resources must be committed to perform police duties, impeding the use of those resources to better effect elsewhere. In case of conflict, armed or otherwise, with China, Russia, or some other power, Iraq will be a useful pressure point to deplete American resources through encouragement and financing of Islamic extremists. In the long view, the surge only underpins a high-risk strategy that sooner or later will have to be dismantled.

If, however, the stated goal of "promoting democracy" is the actual goal, of course the entire mission is a failure. Popular sovereignty cannot be imposed by a foreign army. Iraqi political culture has not developed Anglo-American political values. We should by now recognize that the adoption of constitutional forms such as presidents and parliaments by Asian and African nations does not translate into the practice of Anglo-American style representative government. These forms are quickly adapted by traditional elites to their traditional purposes. Iraq bears no special qualities to suggest any different outcome there. While there is some reason to accept the sincerity of the stated intention to "establish democracy," it was never a realistic goal.

The real question, then, is not whether the surge is working, but whether the occupation is necessary. A case has been made for invasion and occupation, but a weak and dishonest one. The weakness of that case has undermined what domestic support there might have been for an American presence in Iraq. A stronger case could be made, but this would require a frankness alien to American political discourse. Perhaps this frankness is what is required to bring about the changes necessary to dismantle the fragile oil-dependent world order: it would certainly be an easier transition if policy decisions were not of necessity cloaked in ever more implausible deceptions.

Sexist Comments from NOW Chapter President in Support of Clinton

2008-01-31T14:53:00.001-08:00

Marcia Pappas, the President of the New York State chapter of the National Organization of Women, gained a bit of notoriety on Monday when she called Sen. Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama the "ultimate betrayal" of women. The logic went something like this: Kennedy's endorsement was driven not by shared political beliefs but rather a patriarchal mentality that women like Sen. Hillary Clinton should not, be president.

Provocative, to be sure. But, it turns out, not the first (or perhaps most) controversial statement made by the NOW head in the 2008 campaign. Weeks earlier, in a organizational press release, Pappas described the reaction to Clinton's now famous "crying" moment in New Hampshire as a "psychological gang bang" -- similar to the raping of Jodi Foster's character in The Accused...

The press release,

titled "Psychological Gang Bang of Hillary is Proof We Need a Woman

President," was released on January 11. In it, Pappas offered scathing

criticism of Sen. John Kerry - much in the way she did Kennedy - for

choosing to endorse Obama. The former Democratic presidential nominee,

she penned, was joining the "playground gang."

Source: huffingtonpost.com

Outrageous nonsense. It's politics. If people don't like a candidate, man or woman, they are perfectly free to say so, and perfectly free to endorse the candidates they do like.

Hillary Clinton is running for President and many people oppose her. Maybe some oppose her because she is a woman. That is their right. Others may oppose her because she is a phony. That is their right. Others may oppose her because of her inexperience. That is their right. But in no way is opposing a candidate for President even remotely similar to participation in gang rape.

There are people who want Mrs Clinton to be President because they think she would be a good President. Then there are people who want her to be President because she is a woman. The latter group are not very bright. Though it is their right to choose a President on the basis of gender, it is just as legitimate to choose to vote for a male President. Or does gender equality only apply to women? You can't vote on the basis of gender and deny other voters the same choice. Well, you can try, but you look awfully stupid.

By the way, if you have to have a woman President, you could do a whole lot better than Mrs Clinton. She even makes Ann Coulter look appealing.

Pirate Bay Admins Charged with Assisting Copyright Infringement

2008-01-31T09:53:00.001-08:00

The Swedish prosecutor Håkan Roswall has announced the charges against four individuals involved with The Pirate Bay. The four, aged 23 to 37, are being charged with “assisting copyright infringement” of 4 software applications, 9 films and 22 music tracks.
Source: torrentfreak.com via slenderdog

In a response to the charges, Pirate Bay co-founder Peter Sunde (”Brokep”) told TorrentFreak: “We’re of course interested in seeing the outcome of the case, and we welcome that they want to try to criminalize something we already know is legal.”

The legal investigation started almost two years ago, after the controversial raid on the Pirate Bay in May 2006. At the time the Swedish police confiscated 180 servers, most of which had nothing to do with TPB. Last December the investigation finally came to an end, resulting in 4,000 pages of legal paperwork.

The users of the site don’t have to worry that the site will be taken offline though, no matter what the court decides. “In case we lose the pending trial (yeah right) there will still not be any changes to the site. The Pirate Bay will keep operating just as always. We’ve been here for years and we will be here many more,” Sunde said.

As we wrote earlier today, The Pirate Bay is not hosted in Sweden anymore. In fact, the Pirate Bay crew claims that they themselves have no idea where the servers are located. After the raid on their servers in 2006, they decided that it was better not to know where they are. One thing is sure though, they are not hosted in just a single country.

Source: torrentfreak.com via slenderdog

We've said it before and we'll say it again: music is free. Trying to stop people copying and file sharing is not like trying to stop them from making counterfeit CDs. It's like trying to stop them singing songs. They can do it and they will do it. Copyright as we know it belongs to the past, when it cost significant money to produce content. Now it costs almost nothing. The revenue is in advertising. The record labels need to get busy and grab their share instead of trying to make criminals out of ordinary people.

Policeman tells Ron Paul Campaigner: "Be careful. I wouldn't want you to get shot."

2008-01-31T06:46:00.001-08:00

Adam Wood walked from door to door, each slamming in his face. He was in a far away state, yet every person in the Botany Woods suburb of South Carolina seemed to hate him. The police were called, and an officer motioned for Wood, Lawrence junior, to come have a chat.
The police officer told Wood he needed a solicitor's license to canvass for Ron Paul, and Wood politely denied the statement. The police officer thought carefully then gave his reply.

"Well, you be careful," he said. "I wouldn't want you to get shot."

Source: cbsnews.com

Botany Woods looks like a nice, respectable neighborhood where folks don't discuss politics--reminds us of Singapore except for the lack of fiscal and political integrity. At least in Singapore there is no illusion that the people have a voice in political matters.

Ron Paul, Is America Really Going Bankrupt?

2008-01-31T06:33:00.001-08:00

Individuals in our country can't print their own money, but there is a private bank that can. It's called the Federal Reserve. And they do. And then they lend it to our government with interest. There are nearly 26 dollars in circulation now for every 1 dollar in circulation in 1959. And the rate of printing this money is increasing. In 2007 alone we printed more dollars than the total amount that existed in 1963. While the number of dollars has increased 26 fold, the population hasn't even doubled over that same period.
Source: nolanchart.com

A simple explanation of the consequences of excessive deficit spending. It is somewhat misleading to put the blame on the Federal Reserve, since they only facilitate the dysfunctional federal spending process. Even the Comptroller General has given up on talking to Congress about the problem. It is unfortunate that only one nationally known presidential candidate has raised this issue. And it is telling that he is dismissed by "serious" commentators as unrealistic. What is unrealistic is the notion that the American economy is somehow immune to the consequences of reckless fiscal policy. Why worry? After all, they said the Titanic was unsinkable.

Fed Rate Cut Won't Stop a Recession

2008-01-30T13:32:00.001-08:00

The Federal Reserve on Wednesday cut a key interest rate for the second time in just over a week, reducing the federal funds rate by a half point. It signaled that further rate cuts were possible.
The Fed action pushed the funds rate to 3 percent. It followed a three-fourths of a percentage point cut on Jan. 22, a day after financial markets around the world had plummeted on fears that the U.S. economy was heading into a recession. That decrease had been the biggest one-day move in more than two decades...

In a brief statement explaining their

decision, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues said

that "financial markets remain under considerable stress."
Source: breitbart.com

No surprise. No, not even the size of the cut. It just smells of panic.

We don't need cheaper rates and more loans. Even lower rates aren't likely to encourage people with excessive debt to borrow more--and hopefully the banks are lending more cautiously. It isn't that we want a recession, but that we need a recession to correct the effects of the "irrational exuberance" that Alan Greenspan first criticized and later embraced. Easy credit is precisely what brought this situation about: too many loans secured against overvalued assets. The bad loans need to be written off, asset prices need to fall. Yes, some people will suffer but they'll survive and they'll have learned that borrowing is not risk free.

Hillary's word: It's worth nothing

2008-01-30T09:07:00.001-08:00

COURTING VOTERS in Iowa and New Hampshire, last August Sen. Hillary Clinton signed a pledge not to "campaign or participate" in the Michigan or Florida Democratic primaries. She participated in both primaries and is campaigning in Florida. Which proves, again, that Hillary Clinton is a liar.

Clinton kept her name on the Michigan ballot when others removed theirs, she campaigned this past weekend in Florida, and she is pushing to seat Michigan and Florida delegates at the Democratic National Convention. The party stripped those states of delegates as punishment for moving up their primary dates.

"I will try to persuade my delegates to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida," Clinton said last week, after the New Hampshire primaries and Iowa caucuses were safely over.

Clinton coldly and knowingly lied to New Hampshire and Iowa. Her promise was not a vague statement. It was a signed pledge with a clear and unequivocal meaning.

She signed it thinking that keeping the other candidates out of Michigan and Florida was to her advantage, but knowing she would break it if that proved beneficial later on. It did, and she did.

New Hampshire voters, you were played for suckers.

"Sob, sob, some of us are wrong and some of us are right."

John Edwards Drops Out

2008-01-30T08:26:00.001-08:00

The two-time White House candidate notified a close circle of senior advisers that he planned to make the announcement at a 1 p.m. EST event in New Orleans that had been billed as a speech on poverty, according to two aides. The decision came after Edwards lost the four states to hold nominating contests so far to rivals who stole the spotlight from the beginning - Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.
Source: hosted.ap.org via slenderdog

Ah, the demagogue who would be king has seen the futility of his ways. Mr Edwards failed to inspire a wide following because he was primarily an issues campaigner. Certainly his policies attracted a loyal core of policy-oriented supporters, but his attempts at image building came across as tepid and lame. Let's face it, poverty is not sexy. And rabble-rousing doesn't qualify as inspiration. How are you going to persuade people to vote their 401(k)s down the toilet? If only he had kept it vague and fluffy he might have had a chance. At least now he can go back to his regular hairdresser.

Professional Protest Stall on Police March

2008-01-30T05:32:00.001-08:00

Realising that the Police are far more used to being on the other side of protests, the Space Hijackers set up a stall at the Police March offering tips on protesting, free placards and even police issue anti F.I.T team face masks

Source: indymedia.org.uk

U2 manager takes Internet providers to task

2008-01-30T02:59:00.001-08:00

Paul McGuinness, longtime manager of rock band U2, has called on Internet service providers to immediately introduce disconnection policies to end illegal music downloads and urged governments

to make sure they do.

In a passionate keynote speech delivered Monday during the

International Managers Summit at the MIDEM music conference,

McGuinness said it was time for artists to stand up against

what he called the "shoddy, careless and downright dishonest

way they have been treated in the digital age."

He spread the blame between record labels that "through

lack of foresight and planning allowed a range of industries to

arise that let people steal music"; Silicon Valley companies

that create marvelous devices but "don't think of themselves as

makers of burglary kits"; and governments who "created a

thieves' charter" by agreeing that ISPs should not be

responsible for what passes along their pipes.

"There's a lot of money in the music business, but it has

stopped coming to the artists," McGuinness said, though he

agreed that U2 long ago determined that it "would be pathetic

to be great artists but not be great at business.

Source: news.yahoo.com

Yes, there's a lot of money in the music business. But it's the record companies' fault that people have latched on to download technology without them. They have insisted on clinging to the hard copy distribution model that made them wealthy. This model allowed them to control access and presented a significant entry barrier to independent labels and artists since the capital requirements to manufacture and distribute large volumes were beyond the reach of small investors.

Now technology has smashed that model to pieces. They can't even give CDs away any more. Mr McGuinness is, naturally, concerned about declining revenues. But hasn't, ahem, cannabis prohibition taught us anything? People are still smoking like chimneys. If you criminalize free downloads, you only criminalize your audience. These people are your customers, sir.

Mr. McGuinness has the wrong end of the stick. Instead of clinging, like the industry dinosaurs, to the old business model and revenue streams, he should be devising means to exploit the demand for free downloads and reaping the revenues. It's a new world. The internet is free. Music is free. Wake up and get on with real business and stop moaning because you've been caught with your pants down.

From major to minor

2008-01-29T15:19:00.003-08:00

IN 2006 EMI, the world's fourth-biggest recorded-music company, invited some teenagers into its headquarters in London to talk to its top managers about their listening habits. At the end of the session the EMI bosses thanked them for their comments and told them to help themselves to a big pile of CDs sitting on a table. But none of the teens took any of the CDs, even though they were free. “That was the moment we realised the game was completely up,” says a person who was there.
Source: economist.com

Yes, the game is up. Record companies are no longer record companies. Remember records? Vinyl? Record companies came into existence back in the days when music was recorded on wax. Technical advances brought about more durable media such as tape and vinyl. Record companies in those days provided vital services to recording artists and the listening public: manufacture and distribution. Records, and later tapes and CDs are physical media that must be produced, warehoused and distributed, all capital intensive activities. Recording artists could never hope to sell their recordings to the public without significant investment. Whatver might be said about the terms of the contracts offered to artists (and many would argue that artists were systematically exploited), these companies provided the only viable avenue of transmission for popular music.

Yet there was always a populist edge to popular music. Cassette tapes and CDs brought artists the capability to produce, although on a scale limited by the physical nature of these media, their own recordings. And popular music has always flirted with rebellion. Now the physical media are as good as obsolete, and rebellion is in full bloom. Music is free. So what are the record companies to do, now that nobody buys records? What value do they offer?

The answer is, very little. Technology has destroyed their business model. True, there will always be some interest in physical media. Vinyl has some niche appeal. But even if the record companies could somehow prevent illegal downloading and charge listeners for their downloads, their revenues would be driven into the ground because the costs associated with physical media are no more. The marginal cost of a download is negligible. The economy of scale is within reach of the ordinary man. There is no rationale for the 20th century record company. We no longer buy steam engines and we no longer buy records.

Record companies have one powerful tool in their arsenal: copyright. But this, too, will be taken away from them. Copyright is meant to protect the interests of the creators of content, not its distributors. As artists take control of their own production, record companies will have little but their existing stock of copyrighted material, the value of which is being eroded by free downloads.

Where is the future for record companies? The future may well have passed them by. If they had understood the appeal of free music downloads they would have set up their own free download sites supported by advertising and merchandising, and captured sufficient market share to ensure survival in some form. If they wish to compete in this market they need to embrace free, as in free, downloads fully.
They need to face facts: most people will not pay for music anymore. What this means is that the old style record company has lost its relevance. Expect to see them swallowed whole and digested by other media. Maybe they can survive as publicity and merchandising engines, but their grip on the music business is broken for good.

From major to minor

2008-01-29T15:19:00.001-08:00

IN 2006 EMI, the world's fourth-biggest recorded-music company, invited some teenagers into its headquarters in London to talk to its top managers about their listening habits. At the end of the session the EMI bosses thanked them for their comments and told them to help themselves to a big pile of CDs sitting on a table. But none of the teens took any of the CDs, even though they were free. “That was the moment we realised the game was completely up,” says a person who was there.
Source: economist.com

US Government Official Wants to Redefine Privacy

2008-01-29T09:59:00.001-08:00

As Congress debates new rules for government eavesdropping, a top intelligence official says it is time that people in the United States changed their definition of privacy.

Privacy no longer can mean anonymity, says Donald Kerr, the principal deputy director of national intelligence. Instead, it should mean that government and businesses properly safeguard people's private communications and financial information.
Source: guardian.co.uk

Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Who are these people in Washington? What do they think they're doing?

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is very clear:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons,

houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall

not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,

supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be

searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Mr Kerr seems to believe that, because the capacity exists for government to monitor and catalog private communication, that capacity should be used. On the contrary. The United States government was restricted by the Fourth Amendment from this sort of activity, and with good reason. The men who fought for independence from the King of England knew that if a government were allowed to spy on its citizens, the power to spy and the information gathered by that process would be turned against political dissenters. They understood that a government that could monitor and silence its political opponents would cease to be a government of the people. They understood that government does not grant rights to people.

The internet does not change any of these basic facts. In the past, the government could open private letters and arbitrarily search and arrest people. Today, they can more easily and surreptitiously intercept emails and telephone conversations. Technological facility does not in any way sanctify illicit surveillance.

This "government knows best" attitude is nothing new. After all, why would the Fourth Amendment have been drafted unless that human tendency were well known? It is human nature we are contending with. Those with power seek to expand their power--often with protestations of noble intent, such as "safety" and "security." A charitable assessment of Mr Kerr's statements would conclude that he and his ilk seek only to protect us from the "terrorists" of the world. Those of us who remember the Cold War recall the loyalty oaths and fear-mongering and see parallels: then, as now, we suffered more abuse at the hands of our self-appointed protectors than from the nebulous "enemy" ostensibly hiding under the bed.

Is the Department of Homeland Security censoring a citizen’s personal blog?; HR.1955

2008-01-29T08:40:00.001-08:00

Yesterday, I mentioned the blog post I saw which was repeatedly censored by an IP address owned by the Department of Homeland security. This morning, I got an email from Rob, the author, saying that he’d been taken an involuntary trip to his local FBI building where he was held and interrogated for six hours! This is the email I received:

    Hey Rich, just wanted to follow up on your comment on my blog and the post on yours. My name’s Rob, by the way, hi, nice to meet you. Apparently, I actually did upset a few people with some of the information I posted. This resulted in an involuntary trip to the local FBI offices. Didn’t even know they were in town - guess they’re everywhere these days.

    So from what I gathered in our conversation (if you can call it that - it was a bit one-sided), a couple of things set them off. They’ve got some tracking software sorting through everything out there, looking for certain keywords. If it picks up a keyword, you get put on a list and monitored. I got flagged the first time as a result of my post on Canada placing the US on its terror watch list. Among other things, mention of Guantanamo, Afghanistan, torture, and terrorism set the software off.

    A couple of posts later, I did a parody of an interview with al-Quaeda representative Ayman al-Zawahri. This seemed to set them off, too. They wanted to know what my connections were to the group - I guess they were obligated to ask. The thing that really got them in that article was an offhand remark about the weaponization of smallpox based on some work an Australian research group did with mousepox. Here’s a link to the research:

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W7H-4FY294W-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=eca18e63d72852b2456736df13e39495

    You may need a subscription to view it, I’m not sure. Anyway, I assumed that this was pretty common knowledge. Of course, I also work in biomedical chemistry, so I guess I hear some things the general public doesn’t. They were really freaked out about this. Don’t blame them - if you’ve got some time, pick up Ken Alibeck’s (sp?) book on the supposedly now-defunct Russian bioterrorism program. But that’s a story for another day.

    The stuff about homegrown terrorism was the last straw, they said. I guess posting instructions for some lame explosives along with criticism of HR1955 pissed them off. They decided to teach me a lesson by first censoring, then removing the offending blog post. They figured that if I was posting stuff like this, it was only a matter of time before I moved on to more complex agents, based on my education and employment background. It took me about six and a half hours to convince these assholes that I’m not a terrorist. I am certain I’m on every watch list they’ve got now. Not looking forward to my next trip to the airport, that’s for damn sure.
Source: thenewfreedom.net

So, not only can the Federal Police monitor your phone calls, they can censor your blog! How, we wonder, were they able to gain access to this blog to censor it? Did they using keystroke logging to discover the password? Or do they have backdoor access to typepad? Really, we'd like to know.

What's more, we'd like to know what law authorizes the Federal Police to restrict freedom of speech?

Cannabis bigger cancer risk than cigarettes: study

2008-01-29T03:31:00.001-08:00

Smoking a joint is equivalent to 20 cigarettes in terms of lung cancer risk, scientists in New Zealand have found, as they warned of an "epidemic" of lung cancers linked to cannabis.
ADVERTISEMENT
click here

Studies in the past have demonstrated that cannabis can cause cancer, but few have established a strong link between cannabis use and the actual incidence of lung cancer.

In an article published in the European Respiratory Journal, the scientists said cannabis could be expected to harm the airways more than tobacco as its smoke contained twice the level of carcinogens, such as polyaromatic hydrocarbons, compared with tobacco cigarettes.
Source: news.yahoo.com via slenderdog

We always wondered how cannabis users could claim that there was no risk of cancer from inhaling cannabis smoke. It's not the case, however, that everyone who smokes will develop cancer. Smoking does heighten the risk.

Cancers are abnormal growths within the body that compete with healthy cells for nutrients and eventually disrupt body function to the point of death. Cancers are made up of cells that have lost the capacity to regulate cell division through mutation. These mutated cells multiply without restraint and overtake healthy cells, impeding normal body function. Exposure to smoke may bring mutation and subsequently, cancer. Whether an individual develops cancer depends on his cells' response to mutagens and his body's response to the unwanted growths resulting from mutation.

What does seem clear is that any sort of smoking increases the risk of cancer and of lung and heart disease. While we view smoking as a matter of personal choice, it seems to be rather an unwise choice. We recommend cannabis enthusiasts ingest their chosen intoxicant. The effect is not as immediate but the breathing is easier.

Candidates Put Profit Makers On Axis Of Evil

2008-01-29T02:23:00.001-08:00

There's little wrong with America that can't be fixed with a bit more attention to corporate profits. To boosting them, I mean.
I know, it doesn't seem politic to say such things right now, what with presidential candidates ranging from Hillary Clinton to Mike Huckabee ridiculing CEOs and channeling the class-warfare diatribes of discredited doomsayers from 75 years ago...

Source: ibdeditorials.com

How refreshing to learn that not everyone is reacting to economic uncertainty with the rhetoric of "class warfare."

It's abhorrent when Democratic hopeful John Edwards savages oil companies, utilities, banks and insurers for their supposedly rapacious behavior, ignoring the fact that millions of Americans own stock in these corporations — directly through 401(k)s and IRAs or indirectly through pension plans — and are relying on continued healthy profits to help finance their retirement, their children's education and their parents' long-term care.

Source: ibdeditorials.com

Who are these big, evil corporations? Why, they're you and me.

Free and Legal Downloads!

2008-01-28T06:27:00.001-08:00

Qtrax is NOT just another P2P network, it provides a complete system for finding and downloading music. The player provides access a web site filled with artist content, including Videos, Ringtones, Lyrics, Album Art, up to the minute artist news! Try finding THAT on any other P2P network. Even better – its FREE AND LEGAL on Qtrax.
Qtrax is the world’s first free and legal peer-to-peer (P2P) digital

music site. Music lovers can discover new music and legally download

full-length, high-quality versions of their favorite songs while

compensating both the artists and the record labels through

non-intrusive and relevant advertising. Qtrax has the unparalleled

support of the major record labels and all of their respective

publishing divisions. Qtrax and its components are developed by

LTDnetwork Inc. a division of Brilliant Technologies Corporation.

Source: qtrax.com via slenderdog

The good news--Qtrax is offering FREE music downloads with the agreement of the major record labels, who are finally waking up to the reality of internet music distribution--their revenue source will be advertising.

The bad news--these free downloads are not compatible with iPod. And it appears that there will be DRM and restrictions on the number of times a track can be played:

If listeners like what they hear, they will be able to purchase those songs, much as they can on iTunes...

At first, Qtrax will have a revenue-sharing arrangement with labels. Eventually, though, it will have to pay the labels a royalty for each time a user plays a song, which could cost quite a bit relative to ad sales.

“I’m a believer in advertising, which pays for an awful lot of media consumption in the U.S.,” said David Card, a senior analyst at Jupiter Research. “But I have yet to see the model that makes me feel good they’ll get enough money out of advertising. The question is, can they get enough mass to lower the royalty?”

Source: nytimes.com via slenderdog

It appears the model is "free samples with ads and upsell." How could they sell you tracks that are yours to keep? No, they let you have them and then charge you for them.

How is that going to work when people can just go and download their music free elsewhere? The labels are, predictably, reluctant to give up their claim on the revenue, but they'll have to come up with some very clever approaches to make this model pay. If, perhaps, they sell merchandise and concert tickets through download sites they might be able to retain their relevance to the artists and fans and continue to exist. Free downloads have reminded us that businesses must offer something of value to continue to exist. The internet has created a new model of music distribution in which the old style record label is unnecessary. If the labels want to survive they should be doing sensible things like creating their own websites, offering free downloads and making money off the huge traffic they would generate--but they are stuck in the past. They seem to prefer clinging to their old model and watching their sales volume fall. Only slowly are they realizing that the party's over.

There will always be some market for CDs and even vinyl--but the labels' stranglehold is over. They'd best get what share of the download market and its revenue bearing traffic while they can.