The Ted Stevens Screw-Up

Related Articles:

Fox News
CNN

This could end up being a great example of how politicians will use any tactics to get into office. This country was built on the idea that the people choose who they want to be in office based on their ideas for the nation, correct? Well the politicians we elect don't see it that way; they see it as "anything goes to get my easy salary".

After I thought this man was a shame to politics, Former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens had all charges against him dismissed by a U.S. District Judge who is now also opening a federal investigation of the prosecution team that was against Senator Stevens (he would have won if not for this so he deserves Senator). This could have been any one of three things and none of them are good for the prosecutors:

1) The prosecution was really just that inept. In this case they should all be fired and never allowed to serve in law again because they are absolutely pathetic.

2) Someone had a personal grudge against Senator Stevens and decided that this would be a good way to get at him. In this case whoever this may be, including the prosecution, should all be fired and charged with obstruction on as many counts as possible. This cannot be tolerated.

3) This may not be likely, but if this was planned by any group of people in the Democrat party to get one of their own in office, this election should be redone and the people involved should all be fired, charged with obstruction of justice, sued for everything they have by Stevens for the damages they did, and be exposed to America.

Government Wants To Control The Banks

Related Articles:

Wall Street Journal

The only reason I say "Government" instead of "Obama" in the title is because Bush has a major part in this as well. You would think that the government would want the money back from the bailouts that it gave to banks; I mean that is what it was intended to be, a loan, right? Of course not. That is why at this point the government is not letting any major banks give back their bailouts. Some major banks do not want to have to deal with the strings the government has recently attached to the money and they don't want Obama to be able to control the pay of everyone in the company. I wouldn't want that in my company that's for sure.

This whole stink started in late 2008 under Bush when certain banks were forced to take a bailout under threat of government audit. So basically, our government blackmailed our banks, the private sector, into taking government money. The whole time they had planned to keep control over the banks and now that the banks want out, and are willing to give back all of the taxpayer money, they won't take the money back. We are about to spend trillions of dollars and the government, full of buffoons, will not take the money back because of the power it gives them. This, ladies and gentlemen, was the reason the government was not supposed to be big. Once power grows, it grows exponentially faster and it does not give up power until a revolution occurs. Someone needs to bring one really soon.

War Ethics

Related Articles:

Al Jazeera

Let me use this first paragraph to make this topic clear. I am going to be talking about what is right or wrong during a war. This is not to debate whether or not a war was just or unjust to start in the first place. For the purposes of this post, assume any given war has already begun.

Because I have only one source, I am not going to choose sides here. A human rights group is claiming that Israel mistreated the wounded and attacked medical personnel in the recent invasions in Gaza. Israel is doing its own investigation and is claiming that fighters coming against them were posing as medical personnel or wounded people to lure them in to combat where they would have an advantage. The human rights group has requested and independent investigation and I think that is a great idea.

There are two possibilities for what has occurred here. The first is that Israel really did as the claims say. If this is true Israel is just as bad as any evil dictator and we should not be allies with them. That would be truly wrong and it should be reprimanded. If Israel's claim is true then what they did was fine. If you, as a fighter or combatant, choose to pose as medical personnel or a wounded person you take away the rights of your own medical personnel or wounded. If I am a soldier or a commander and I know this is has been going on, I am going to care about my own life or my own men's lives a lot more than my opponents. This is simply how war goes. You can't fake like you are a non-combatant, then start attacking, and expect that your opponents won't start shooting at other non-combatants.

We will need more information before we can make a decision on this. If anyone has anymore sources on this please post.

Ridding The World Of Nuclear Weapons

Related Articles:

News Daily

Now here is something I can agree with the President on: the world definitely needs to get rid of its nuclear weapons. Back to reality: it won't happen. As long as the knowledge is there someone will try to use them for real or as a deterrent; even if we, the USA, lead the way in destroying them. Here is one of the differences between me and President Obama. The President likes to talk about how they "feel" things are going and what would be ideal for this country. Wonderful. In reality, you can't think that way; you must think about what is feasible. I like to think about what is possible to do. Not everything can be this perfect ideal that everyone dreams of.

Back to the point; who are we to control what other countries are allowed to have and not have? Pull back inside our borders and defend with a vengeance if we are attacked. We shouldn't care in the least bit what other nations want to achieve or what inhumanities are being committed. Those that are oppressed always outnumber the oppressors by a large number and can free themselves as the founders of this country did. We have made a joke out of our military by spreading it so far around the world and too thin. If we used it just as a nasty self-defense no one would bother attacking us either. If someone attacked our home soil we wipe them off of the face of the earth and come back home and move on. Simple. Controlling the world with our military is not the answer.

Global Warming Bias

Related Articles:

The Register
News Busters
World Net Daily
The Register

There is nothing more disgusting to me than an obvious bias in the United States' mass media. The media is responsible for informing people of what is really happening and they clearly do not do that or I would have found a trace of this news on at least one of the major news sites.

First let me explain why any information about global warming is big news no matter which side it is on. Global warming could, by itself, determine the outcome of our economic situation. The government is ready to implement drastic measures to stop global warming. If the cause is us and it really is bad then we must do what is necessary. If the cause is not us this will be a gigantic waste of money and this is not a good time to waste a large sum. That said, why is the media not reporting this recent news that top Japanese scientists are breaking away from the US and the UN on the idea that global warming is caused by man?

Quote from the first article from The Register:

"One of the five contributors compares computer climate modelling to ancient astrology. Others castigate the paucity of the US ground temperature data set used to support the hypothesis, and declare that the unambiguous warming trend from the mid-part of the 20th Century has ceased.

The report by Japan Society of Energy and Resources (JSER) is astonishing rebuke to international pressure, and a vote of confidence in Japan's native marine and astronomical research. Publicly-funded science in the West uniformly backs the hypothesis that industrial influence is primarily responsible for climate change, although fissures have appeared recently. Only one of the five top Japanese scientists commissioned here concurs with the man-made global warming hypothesis.

JSER is the academic society representing scientists from the energy and resource fields, and acts as a government advisory panel. The report appeared last month but has received curiously little attention. So The Register commissioned a translation of the document - the first to appear in the West in any form. Below you'll find some of the key findings - but first, a summary."

Read the rest of that article please.

The fourth article listed, also from The Register, explains an alternate theory actually created by American scientists and that somehow still hasn't made the major news. We are about to spend possibly trillions of dollars on stopping global warming which may be stopped already, and all because the media doesn't inform people. You have to go out and look.

What could be the reasons for this lack of reporting and obvious bias? I had actually bought into the man-made global warming to a point until now. I think we may have had an affect on it but it is a natural cycle. I can think of a few reasons for this.

1. The majority of the media wants America to fail for some unknown, sick reason.

2. The majority of the media is ultra-liberal and wants corporations to fail so by implementing cap and trade they can keep them under control and wield more power over companies.

Any other reasons why this wouldn't be reported?

The Beginning Of Censorship

Related Articles:

The Register
Computerworld
Network World

The beginning of censorship usually happens when the government wants to take over "oversight" of something or run something in "your best interest". Say hello to the future of internet censorship. The government now wants to take over cybersecurity and make cybersecurity rules that would also affect private institutions. Don't you think the government should have to show they can competently secure anything before telling a business how to be secure? The United States government is like one big cyber leak and now they want to run national cybersecurity.

Quote from The Register:

"US senators have drafted legislation that would give the federal government unprecedented authority over the nation's critical infrastructure, including the power to shut down or limit traffic on private networks during emergencies."

Wonderfully vague, as usual. What kind of emergencies are we talking? Raise the terror level to red and create an emergency so you can control what people see during that time? Everything is always vague so that the government has plenty of wiggle room to try and control something that the bill wasn't meant for. That way, since most Americans pay attention to nothing, people don't even know what is going on.

If the President had to fear for his life (or if they made up the situation), then they could easily take any content that was against the President and block it. Far too vague.

Quote from Network World:

"Federal legislation introduced in the Senate this week would give President Obama the power to declare a cybersecurity emergency and then shut down both public and private networks including Internet traffic coming to and from compromised systems."

Too much power; too vague. Anything can be turned into a cybersecurity emergency. After watching what is going on with the internet in the likes of China, Australia, and Germany, I am not a big fan of any internet control. It is the last place with completely free flowing information; there is your reason why they want to control it.

The Media Should Leave Conficker Alone

I am sick and tired of the media using scare tactics on ignorant people in this nation. Within the last week, the Conficker Worm has gotten so much media attention that people were actually comparing this to what we thought was going to happen when 1999 turned into 2000 at midnight. The worm was set to receive some kind of updates today, and because such a big deal was made of it, what it got was minimal. The writers of this were most likely not wanting this insane publicity right now. Once we all forget about it, and we will, they will do whatever it is they wanted to do.

Real information: Most of the time the Conficker Worm exploits a vulnerability in Windows that was patched in October. The worm was most likely written by reverse engineering the Microsoft patch. If you update your computer, you are most likely fine. It also moves using autorun when you plug in an infected USB flash drive. Don't let random people plug anything into your computer.

With the amount of machines they have now it will not be nearly as bad as most news outlets are stating. Most estimates put the botnet they now control at a little over 2 million computers. That is extremely large for a botnet and they could probably perform denial of service attacks on some major corporations or the government (I can only hope for that one). They are not going to knock out the entire power grid (at least not until Obama implements his smart grid, then maybe they can) or take the entire internet offline. Stop the scare tactics.