Over the entire course of my life I've heard the statement "If you don't need the drugs don't take them." Or Bleach and Alcohol only kill 99.9% of bacteria... Well what happens to that .01% of germs and bacteria that don't die? I'll tell ya, they become antibiotic resistant and/or resistant to germicides (bleach and alcohol). Anyways, this has been the case with penicillin and has lead to the creation of other antibiotics... Now, we are finding new strains of the flu, which are resistant to the next gen. antibiotics. So Dr. instead of selling the drugs that you make more money off of, or the pills that they show on tv, why not prescribe something that works? Or next time little Timmy gets a cold, tell him to drink allot of fluids and have some Jewish Penicillin (Chicken Noodle Soup)???
Anyways Tamiflu and Relenza, the two most popular flu medicines are starting to find their own resistances because so many people have been using them for so long. Apparently all this research being done by the Japanese simply proves empirically what we've been telling each other for years.
Friday, April 6, 2007
Saturday, March 31, 2007
15 sailors in Iran
What the hell are they thinking? The whole world is looking at them, and they hold 15 sailors captive? That makes plenty of sense... Are t hey trying to start WWIII??? I mean seriously, that has to be the worst idea Irann has had since teh nuclear powerplant incident earlier this year, I just cant grasp it. WTH???
Friday, March 9, 2007
The FBI obtained information illegally? NO WAY?!?!
The PATRIOT Act was signed shortly after this nation fell victim to terrorist attacks on Sept. 11 2001, 6 years later reports of illegal information gathering have been piling up, however, I find it interesting that only the FBI is releasing a report about misconduct.
The Act itself gave allot of power to the government's intelligence agencies and marginalized our civil liberties, and even Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor commented on the loss of our civil liberties "We're likely to experience more restrictions on our personal freedoms now than has ever been the case in our country."
The article "FBI obtained records 'illegally' "in the BBC news states that "22% of the cases it investigated contained one or more possible unreported or unidentified violations." It also mentions that there were 47,000 requests of national security letters, which means that if they investigated 47,000 different cases, about 10,000 mistakes happened. Thats a bit scary no?
Then to save face (I think) the Attorney General, condemned the FBI's director. Every day I am finding more and more reasons why I don't trust our government. This is saddening and getting really old now.
The Act itself gave allot of power to the government's intelligence agencies and marginalized our civil liberties, and even Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor commented on the loss of our civil liberties "We're likely to experience more restrictions on our personal freedoms now than has ever been the case in our country."
The article "FBI obtained records 'illegally' "in the BBC news states that "22% of the cases it investigated contained one or more possible unreported or unidentified violations." It also mentions that there were 47,000 requests of national security letters, which means that if they investigated 47,000 different cases, about 10,000 mistakes happened. Thats a bit scary no?
Then to save face (I think) the Attorney General, condemned the FBI's director. Every day I am finding more and more reasons why I don't trust our government. This is saddening and getting really old now.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
"Politically Correctness Means Always Having to Say "You're Sorry""
I can't really grasp why people are so hurt by others being not politically correct. In fact, I really dislike the whole idea of rephrasing things because certain words have negative connotations or what have you. Moreover, the fact of the matter is, we are supposed to be saying what we mean, and meaning what we say, but when this whole political correctness idea came about, we essentially chose to censor ourselves. Being politically correct means always having to say your sorry, I'M NOT FUCKING SORRY!!! I don't want to be sorry either. Why should I feel guilty about expressing my opinion. It's not a thing about tact, or being polite, it is not fair to speakers, where is the equality?
In our discussion today, (which was centered around public education and teaching about homosexuality) we brought up terms like "Fag" or "Dyke" or phrases like "that's so gay" and so on. I believe it should be understood by everyone that these terms, need to be looked at in terms of context. If no one is gay in your proximity, and you say "that's so gay" generally speaking they are saying it is "dumb" but WHO CARES? (it was brought up that making this stament belittles gay people by saying they are dumb or insignificant, not the case at all). I'll tell you who cares. The Gay community, wait, that term is no longer PC, are they the "Homosexual Community?" What do we call them, wait I can't say "them" because that implies they are different, or not part of the rest... BUT THEY ARE DIFFERENT! That's the point of establishing the community isn't it, seperating yourself from people who are different from you and identifying yourself with people of like minds? Aren't "they" trying to fight back and protect themselves (wait, themselves, I can't use that term either can I ?), against all the bad things that have happened to LBGT people.
Let me take this time to say that I really don't care who you choose to be with, if you are gay, or whatever, I JUST DON'T CARE. There are some great gay people out there and there are some terrible gay people too, I bet. The question of whether or not gay people are second class citizens or not, I don't think they aren't, however thats my opinion. This community needs to assert themselves. Isn't that the whole free speech and responsibility idea? PROTEST, pass out pamphlets, educate people, don't let yourself be oppressed. FIGHT BACK.
Back to the PC idea, how and when did it come about? Wikipedia defines it as "Political correctness (often abbreviated to PC) is a term used to describe language or behavior which is intended, or said to be intended, to provide a minimum of offense, particularly to racial, cultural, or other identity groups. A text that conforms to the alleged ideals of political correctness is said to be politically correct." The history they give states that this movement started about "in the 1990s, the term became part of a conservative challenge to curriculum and teaching methods on college campuses in the United States (D'Souza 1991; Berman 1992; Schultz 1993; Messer Davidow 1993, 1994; Scatamburlo 1998). In a commencement address at the University of Michigan in 1991, President George H. W. Bush spoke out against administrators and academics who would "declare certain topics off-limits, certain expressions off-limits, even certain gestures off-limits" (Glassner 1999)." However they state that it can be traced back to 1793 in a US Supreme Court case of Chisholm v. Georgia."
(Wikipedia reminds me of Starship Troopers, remember how the Propaganda Commercials always said "Do You Want to Know More?" Then in another window it goes on in more detail and gives back story... Wikipedia is the same way, I mean look at all the hyperlinks in the paragraph I copied.)
Back from that tangent, in the end, we as a people need to stop letting people with thier own agendas tell us how we are supposed to express ourselves, no one should be able to decide what is and is not ok to talk about. NOTHING OUGHT TO BE OFFLIMITS! (Well thats where freespeech and responsibility comes in again.) I don't want to contradict myself, and I fear this statement will do just that, however, I would like to say it anyways, somethings shouldn't be said at certain times, so the Supreme Court's time/place/manner limitations on free speech makes sense.
In our discussion today, (which was centered around public education and teaching about homosexuality) we brought up terms like "Fag" or "Dyke" or phrases like "that's so gay" and so on. I believe it should be understood by everyone that these terms, need to be looked at in terms of context. If no one is gay in your proximity, and you say "that's so gay" generally speaking they are saying it is "dumb" but WHO CARES? (it was brought up that making this stament belittles gay people by saying they are dumb or insignificant, not the case at all). I'll tell you who cares. The Gay community, wait, that term is no longer PC, are they the "Homosexual Community?" What do we call them, wait I can't say "them" because that implies they are different, or not part of the rest... BUT THEY ARE DIFFERENT! That's the point of establishing the community isn't it, seperating yourself from people who are different from you and identifying yourself with people of like minds? Aren't "they" trying to fight back and protect themselves (wait, themselves, I can't use that term either can I ?), against all the bad things that have happened to LBGT people.
Let me take this time to say that I really don't care who you choose to be with, if you are gay, or whatever, I JUST DON'T CARE. There are some great gay people out there and there are some terrible gay people too, I bet. The question of whether or not gay people are second class citizens or not, I don't think they aren't, however thats my opinion. This community needs to assert themselves. Isn't that the whole free speech and responsibility idea? PROTEST, pass out pamphlets, educate people, don't let yourself be oppressed. FIGHT BACK.
Back to the PC idea, how and when did it come about? Wikipedia defines it as "Political correctness (often abbreviated to PC) is a term used to describe language or behavior which is intended, or said to be intended, to provide a minimum of offense, particularly to racial, cultural, or other identity groups. A text that conforms to the alleged ideals of political correctness is said to be politically correct." The history they give states that this movement started about "in the 1990s, the term became part of a conservative challenge to curriculum and teaching methods on college campuses in the United States (D'Souza 1991; Berman 1992; Schultz 1993; Messer Davidow 1993, 1994; Scatamburlo 1998). In a commencement address at the University of Michigan in 1991, President George H. W. Bush spoke out against administrators and academics who would "declare certain topics off-limits, certain expressions off-limits, even certain gestures off-limits" (Glassner 1999)." However they state that it can be traced back to 1793 in a US Supreme Court case of Chisholm v. Georgia."
(Wikipedia reminds me of Starship Troopers, remember how the Propaganda Commercials always said "Do You Want to Know More?" Then in another window it goes on in more detail and gives back story... Wikipedia is the same way, I mean look at all the hyperlinks in the paragraph I copied.)
Back from that tangent, in the end, we as a people need to stop letting people with thier own agendas tell us how we are supposed to express ourselves, no one should be able to decide what is and is not ok to talk about. NOTHING OUGHT TO BE OFFLIMITS! (Well thats where freespeech and responsibility comes in again.) I don't want to contradict myself, and I fear this statement will do just that, however, I would like to say it anyways, somethings shouldn't be said at certain times, so the Supreme Court's time/place/manner limitations on free speech makes sense.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Michael McConnell is Captain Obvious.
THANKYOU CAPTAIN OBVIOUS!The head of the United States Intelligence Agency says that Al-Queda, Hezbollah, North Korea and Iran pose major threats to the US. Really??? NO WAY? I never knew or thought that these nations and organizations were dangerous, let alone posed a threat to our country.
Then he moves on and says "Iraq is moving in a negative direction" wait, what did he say? Iraq of all places, its not doing so well and it's in fact moving in a "negative direction"? Well what does that mean? Have we run into some problems over there?
He even says that N. Korea and Iran possibly have WMD's or have the abilities to make them. OH MY GOD! That's inconceivable, impossible, incomprehensible.
"We assess that Iran seeks to develop nuclear weapons and has shown greater interest in drawing out the negotiations rather than reaching an acceptable diplomatic solution," he said.
Wow, this man is in charge of our intelligence community and he sounds like a broken record. We already know this stuff. Not one thing he said was news, or noteworthy, why because he is pointing out the obvious. Was he left in the dark, did he think we were left in the dark? Why is he reporting things that everyone already knows?
I don't understand how this man, Michael McConnell, is the head of the intelligence community and makes such an unintelligent statement.
It was brought to my attention that it may be in the interest of National Security for them not to tell us anything new, but why tell us anything if we have already heard it at all. If it serves National Security, maybe we should just not hear anything at all about it, wait, isn't that kinda like what ostriches do when something bad happens, stick their heads underground. Is that any different?
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Treasonus or Not?
DID THIS MAN COMMIT TREASON TOO?
Mr. Lewis "Scooter" Libby is in the final stages of his courtroom battle over whether or not he lied... if the lie was a lie and who the lie effected. He was charged with one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of making false statements, and two counts of perjury. He was Dick Chenney's Chief of Staff from 2001 until October 2006, but we can throw loyalties out the window at this point. Cheney was going to be the first VP ever to sit on the stand, but that didnt happen. Apparently they felt it would not work well for the defendant when the cross examination of the Vp was to take place. Also, each one of the counts takes a $250,000 price tag, so the bottom line is... (drumb roll please) 1.25 million Dollars.
A little background before the case:
Scooter Libby composed a report with Neoconservative Wolf Blitzer, this report outlined global US military supremecy, "The draft DPG called for massive increases in defense spending, the assertion of lone superpower status, the prevention of the emergence of any regional competitors, the use of preventive—or preemptive—force, and the idea of forsaking multilateralism if it didn't suit U.S. interests (http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1271).
It was not until mid-2005, however, that Libby found himself subject to widespread media attention, when his name increasingly appeared in news stories about the leak of Plame's identity (U.S. News and World Report, October 31, 2005).
Where does Treason fit in?
A spy's name, an American spy, was released to the public. But, this act of treason is going un punished, then again, she is suing the government for the premature end of her career. Maybe, because now other people who she dealt with in the past may want to kill her?
What do you think?
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Skeptical View of Current Events, Gun Boat Diplomacy Again!
I was reading the Economist the other day, and the cover had a picture of a B-2 bomber with the caption "Next Stop, Iran?" I'm curious as to what the point of sending a bomber to Iran would be. The US government has stated that they do not want to enter a conflict with Iran, however, it seems to be ominous (if thats the right word)... Moreover, they, (the government) have stated that the nuclear facility in Iran ought to be shut down, but how do they plan on getting that done? We can't blow it up, that would be wrong, we can ask them diplomaticly, but no one will listen, all we can do is threaten them and that does not seem like too bright of an idea.
We are in the process of bribing North Korea with fuel oil in order for thier surrender of their Nuclear capabilities, we invaded Iraq because we thought they had WMD's, but Iran? Iran has the capabilities and most likely has the bomb, but can we afford a conflict? "WE ARE not planning for a war with Iran." So said Robert Gates, America's new defence secretary, on February 2nd.
This nation is in debt, we are running out of supplies (there is a 3 year backup on vehicle repairs out of Iraq, and we simply do not have the work force in this country to fix them). In the Gulf, we have aircraft carriers, and I can only imagine that G-Dub, thinks he is the reincarnation of Teddy Roosevelt. he might just be thinking "If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does not do what I want, I will blow him off the face of the earth?" Doesn't that seem a bit ridiculous? Or am I just reading things wrong? Did I miss something?
I have no idea what the hell he is thinking, put simply, we are already spread too thin, we have soldiers all over the place and unless we reinstate the draft, we will never have enough people enlisted in our armed forces.
Is it just some sort of anti Iran propaganda in order to insite anger and hostility? I don't know, but I fear the results could be disasterous.
Update
Jflog-
I don't think reinstating the draft is a good thing, but several other countries have mandatory military service :
We are in the process of bribing North Korea with fuel oil in order for thier surrender of their Nuclear capabilities, we invaded Iraq because we thought they had WMD's, but Iran? Iran has the capabilities and most likely has the bomb, but can we afford a conflict? "WE ARE not planning for a war with Iran." So said Robert Gates, America's new defence secretary, on February 2nd.
This nation is in debt, we are running out of supplies (there is a 3 year backup on vehicle repairs out of Iraq, and we simply do not have the work force in this country to fix them). In the Gulf, we have aircraft carriers, and I can only imagine that G-Dub, thinks he is the reincarnation of Teddy Roosevelt. he might just be thinking "If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does not do what I want, I will blow him off the face of the earth?" Doesn't that seem a bit ridiculous? Or am I just reading things wrong? Did I miss something?
I have no idea what the hell he is thinking, put simply, we are already spread too thin, we have soldiers all over the place and unless we reinstate the draft, we will never have enough people enlisted in our armed forces.
Is it just some sort of anti Iran propaganda in order to insite anger and hostility? I don't know, but I fear the results could be disasterous.
Update
Jflog-
I don't think reinstating the draft is a good thing, but several other countries have mandatory military service :
- 2.1 Austria
- 2.2 Belarus
- 2.3 Bermuda
- 2.4 Brazil
- 2.5 Bulgaria
- 2.6 Chile
- 2.7 China (PRC)
- 2.8 Croatia
- 2.9 Cyprus
- 2.10 Denmark
- 2.11 Egypt
- 2.12 Eritrea
- 2.13 Finland
- 2.14 Germany
- 2.15 Greece
- 2.16 Iran
- 2.17 Israel
- 2.18 Korea, South
- 2.19 Lebanon
- 2.20 Malaysia
- 2.21 Mexico
- 2.22 Norway
- 2.23 Poland
- 2.24 Russia
- 2.25 Serbia
- 2.26 Singapore
- 2.27 Sweden
- 2.28 Switzerland
- 2.29 Taiwan (ROC)
- 2.30 Turkey
- 2.31 Ukraine
- (I am not sure how true this list is (courtesy of wikipedia)).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
