Global Warming Scientific Consensus: A Hoax?!?

Only seven percent of the last three year's scientific papers on climate change explicitly endorse a weakened form of the so-called consensus. (Thirty-eight percent implicitly accept.)

The weakened "consensus" tabulated: "Humans were having at least some effect on global climate change."; not the super-hyped, so-called consensus that: "Man is the 'primary' cause of warming", and that global warming will cause one or more catastrophes.

Say it ain't so, Vice President Gore!

(With apologies to Joseph Jefferson "Shoeless Joe" Jackson (Career batting av. - .356, 3rd highest), the Chicago White Sox, and Major League Baseball.)

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."

The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the "primary" cause of warming, but it doesn't require any belief or support for "catastrophic" global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

From a Daily Tech .com article, Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory, more follows:

Survey: Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory [/] Michael Asher (Blog) - August 29, 2007 11:07 AM

Comprehensive survey of published climate research reveals changing viewpoints [/] In 2004, history professor Naomi Oreskes performed a survey of research papers on climate change. Examining peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science database from 1993 to 2003, she found a majority supported the "consensus view," defined as humans were having at least some effect on global climate change. Oreskes' work has been repeatedly cited, but as some of its data is now nearly 15 years old, its conclusions are becoming somewhat dated.

Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte recently updated this research. Using the same database and search terms as Oreskes, he examined all papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising.

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."

The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the "primary" cause of warming, but it doesn't require any belief or support for "catastrophic" global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

These changing viewpoints represent the advances in climate science over the past decade. While today we are even more certain the earth is warming, we are less certain about the root causes. More importantly, research has shown us that -- whatever the cause may be -- the amount of warming is unlikely to cause any great calamity for mankind or the planet itself.

Schulte's survey contradicts the United Nation IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (2007), which gave a figure of "90% likely" man was having an impact on world temperatures. But does the IPCC represent a consensus view of world scientists? Despite media claims of "thousands of scientists" involved in the report, the actual text is written by a much smaller number of "lead authors." The introductory "Summary for Policymakers" -- the only portion usually quoted in the media -- is written not by scientists at all, but by politicians, and approved, word-by-word, by political representatives from member nations. By IPCC policy, the individual report chapters -- the only text actually written by scientists -- are edited to "ensure compliance" with the [[U.N. nations political compromise]] summary, which is typically published months before the actual report itself. [/] By contrast, the ISI Web of Science database covers 8,700 journals and publications, including every leading scientific journal in the world. [My ellipses and emphasis]

The Left's Ongoing Viet Con

The facts reported below are, as far as I know, uncontested by the knowledgeable and honest.

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a IBD Editorials .com article, The Left's Ongoing Viet Con:

The Left's Ongoing Viet Con [/] By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, August 27, 2007 4:20 PM PT

Vietnam: Nothing destroys conventional wisdom like the truth. Those on the anti-war left don't like to be reminded that the fruits of their policies are death and defeat. But the lie they agree upon is not history.

[[(Picture Caption:]] CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite reports from the site of extensive bombing as he covers the aftermath of the Tet offensive for the TV special "Report from Vietnam by Walter Cronkite," during the Vietnam War in 1968. Cronkite broke from the standard of objective journalism when he concluded the broadcast with his observation that the war would end in a stalemate. But the offensive that American media touted as a success was in fact a military disaster for the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese.[[)]]

In 1975, Sydney Schanberg wrote a piece for the New York Times about the consequences for the region of our abandonment of South Vietnam. [/] It bore the Orwellian title: "Indochina Without Americans: For Most A Better Life." Substitute "Iraq" for "Indochina" and you have the Iraq plank in the 2008 Democratic party platform.

Last Saturday, the Los Angeles Times ran a piece by Andrew J. Bacevich, a Boston University history professor and Vietnam War veteran, that fellow vet John Kerry could have written, and which could have borne a similar title regarding Iraq without Americans.

Professor Bacevich takes President Bush to task for reminding the Veterans of Foreign Wars last week that, far from enjoying a better life, the people of Indochina, after they were betrayed by Democrats, became victims of the "killing fields" of Cambodia, inmates of the re-education camps of Vietnam or, if they were lucky, boat people in the South China Sea.

The consequences of following the Democrats on Iraq, Bush said, would result in a similar human catastrophe and a greater terrorist threat to America.

Bacevich's piece is titled "Vietnam's Real Lessons," yet it is he who ignores the truth by writing about a "U.S. defeat" in an "unconventional war." [/] The U.S. military was never defeated in any battle. Not until 1975, after a Democratic Congress cut off aid in a fit of post-Watergate pique, did Saigon fall to an army of 570,000 North Vietnamese regular soldiers and some 900 Soviet tanks, well supplied and armed by their Soviet and Chinese benefactors.

For two years, South Vietnam stood on its own without U.S. boots on the ground. Had we continued military and economic aid, it would be standing today — like South Korea, which we did not abandon.

South Korea was no Athenian democracy back then, and yet we did not throw it to the wolves. Bacevich says we should look at "the condition of Vietnam today." He should look at the condition of South Korea [[today]].

One of the first actions of the Democratic "Watergate babies" was to vote to deny South Vietnam $800 million in military aid, including ammunition and spare parts.

Five weeks after that vote, a surprised and delighted North Vietnam began planning an armored invasion of the South, knowing we had grown war-weary and would not help.

Bacevich speaks of a "Republic of Vietnam, created by the United States," that was not "able to govern effectively or command the loyalty of its people." Yet, as history shows, Vietnam did not fall to a popular uprising by pajama-clad patriots.

The 1968 Tet offensive by the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese was a military disaster. Gen. Giap failed in his plan to seize and hold 13 of 16 provincial capitals and trigger a popular uprising. The communist forces lost upwards of 50,000 killed and as many wounded.

After Tet, the Viet Cong were effectively finished as a fighting force, with the NVA taking over. North Vietnam's 1972 Easter offensive also failed.

It was these failures that led to the January 1973 Paris Peace Accord. But when a Democratic Congress legislated an end to U.S. operations in Indochina that summer, it also stopped U.S. air support of a friendly Cambodian government under siege by Hanoi and the Khmer Rouge.

Former Rep. Tip O'Neill, D-Mass., who was later to become speaker of the House, declared at the time that "Cambodia is not worth the life of one American flier."

The rest — as they say, professor — is history. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Harry Potter Magic: Mechanical Not Occult

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

In a prior thread, Potter Magic Symbol of Technology, I linked several articles showing that Potter magic has much more to do with imagined technology than supernatural religion.

Following the google of "harry potter magic technology" to the second 10 results, the notion of mechanical versus occult magic made its appearance.

From a BreakPoint .org article, Witches and Wizards:

Witches and Wizards [/] By Chuck Colson [/] 11/2/1999

[...] It may relieve you to know that the magic in these books is purely mechanical, as opposed to occultic. That is, Harry and his friends cast spells, read crystal balls, and turn themselves into animals—but they don't make contact with a supernatural world.

Other parents are concerned with the dark themes and violence in the books. After all, Harry's parents are murdered in book one, and throughout the books, Harry is pursued by followers of a murderous wizard named Voldemort. But as the author, J. K. Rowling, points out, "the theme running through all of these books is the fight between good and evil." The plots reinforce the theme that evil is real, and must be courageously opposed.

As this theme unfolds, so do the characters of Harry and his friends. They develop courage, loyalty, and a willingness to sacrifice for one another—even at the risk of their lives. Not bad lessons in a self-centered world. [...]

From a CBN.com Spiritual Life article, The Potter Magic:

OPINION [/] The Potter Magic [/] By Anne Morse [/] BreakPoint Online -

[...] The books are great fun—but should Christian parents worry about their use of magic? After all, the Bible strongly condemns involvement with witchcraft.

It may relieve parents to know that the magic in these books is purely mechanical, as opposed to occultic. Harry and his classmate[s] are born with the ability to perform magic—much as real life kids are born with musical or mathematical ability. Students at Hogwarts learn to cast spells, read crystal balls, and transform hedgehogs into pincushions—but they don’t attempt to contact the supernatural world.

But isn’t it wrong to expose kids to any kind of magic and witchcraft? [/] Wheaton College professor Alan Jacobs has a wonderful response to this concern. In the journal First Things, Jacobs notes that it’s only recently that magic and science were viewed as occupying different realms.

"For much of their existence," Jacobs writes, "both magic and experimental science were viewed as a means of controlling and directing our natural environment." It took several centuries of dedicated scientific experiment "before it was clear to anyone that the ‘scientific’ physician could do more to cure illness than the old woman of the village with her herbs and potions and muttered charms." Magic was gradually viewed as a false discipline.

This history helps us understand the role of magic in the Potter books. The author "begins by positing a history in which magic is not a false discipline," Jacobs writes. Instead, magic, like science, is "a means of controlling the physical world." In this world, Jacobs writes, "magic works as reliably, in the hands of a trained wizard, as the technology that makes airplanes fly and refrigerators chill the air."

No less a Christian than C. S. Lewis makes the distinction between mechanical and supernatural magic in his Narnia series for children. In The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Father Christmas gives magical gifts to the Pevensie children. To Susan, he gives a horn, guaranteed to summon help during times of great need. To Lucy, he gives a vial containing an elixir that will heal even the deadliest injury. The magic of horn and elixir works without the need for the children to call upon supernatural beings. They are perfect examples of mechanical magic.

Like J. K. Rowling, Lewis has created a world in which magic works, and in these fictional worlds it is not magic per se that is morally troublesome.

In Prince Caspian, by contrast, Lewis describes a less innocent form of magical power. A dwarf named Nikabrik desires to bring back the long-dead White Witch to help the Narnians defeat their human enemies. When Prince Caspian realizes what he is proposing, he’s outraged. "So that is your plan, Nikabrik! Black sorcery and the calling up of an accursed spirit. And I see who your companions are—a Hag and a Wer-Wolf!" The prince and his animal allies instantly kill the three (Just, one might add, as the Old Testament commands).

In a sense, whether or not mechanical magic "works" in the Potter books is beside the point. At Harry’s Hogwarts School, one educational goal overrides all others: To help students develop the character and the moral discernment to use a particular technology—in this case, magic—for the common good.

In that sense, the Potter books teach children a great lesson: They, too, must develop moral discernment about real-life technologies—such as the Internet—along with the character to exploit them in ways pleasing to God.

If the Potter books can teach kids to harness technology for good instead of evil, then I say more power—scientifically speaking, of course—to Harry Potter and his wizard friends. [/] Anne Morse is associate editor and senior writer for BreakPoint. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Harry Potter Magic a Symbol of Technology

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

Much as the giant world wide machine in E. M. Forester's "The Machine Stops" was not future technology but a symbol of the 19th century British Empire:

The magical underground culture in J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter series would seem to be a symbol for the marvels of technology that have appeared among us without much wide spread understanding of the underlying science or of the ways in which we are being changed.

I am not alone in this notion. A Google of "harry potter magic technology" turned up the following among the first ten hits.

From a First Things article, Harry Potter's Magic:

[...] As Arthur C. Clarke once wrote, "Any smoothly functioning technology gives the appearance of magic." [/] The fundamental moral framework of the Harry Potter books, then, is a familiar one to all of us: it is the problem of technology. (As Jacques Ellul wrote, "Magic may even be the origin of techniques.") Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is in the business of teaching people how to harness and employ certain powers - that they are powers unrecognized by science is really beside the point - but cannot insure that people will use those powers wisely, responsibly, and for the common good. It is a choice, as the thinkers of the Renaissance would have put it, between magia and goetia: "high magic" (like the wisdom possessed by the magi in Christian legend) and "dark magic."

[...] The educational quandary for Albus Dumbledore, then - though it is never described so overtly - is how to train students not just in the "technology" of magic but also in the moral discernment necessary to avoid the continual reproduction of the few great Dark Lords like Voldemort and their multitudinous followers. [/] The clarity with which Rowling sees the need to choose between good and evil is admirable, but still more admirable, to my mind, is her refusal to allow a simple division of parties into the Good and the Evil. [/] [...] "Exactly," said Dumbledore, beaming once more. "Which makes you very different from [Voldemort]. It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities."

[...] Perhaps the most important question I could ask my Christian friends who mistrust the Harry Potter books is this: is your concern about the portrayal of this imaginary magical technology matched by a concern for the effects of the technology that in our world displaced magic? The technocrats of this world hold in their hands powers almost infinitely greater than those of Albus Dumbledore and Voldemort: how worried are we about them, and their influence over our children? Not worried enough, I would say. As Ellul suggests, the task for us is "the measuring of technique by other criteria than those of technique itself," which measuring he also calls "the search for justice before God." Joanne Rowling's books are more helpful than most in prompting such measurement. [...] [/] Alan Jacobs is Professor of English at Wheaton College.

From an Amazon.com review:

"Science in the Harry Potter books?" "Yes," Highfield, science editor of London's Daily Telegraph, emphatically answers, approaching the topic in a thoroughly playful manner. He is dead serious, however, about using the Potter corpus as the launching pad for a wonderful foray into genetics, biology, quantum theory, behaviorism, mythology, folklore, and more, bolstered by drawing on and extrapolating from the work of a great variety of scientists and scholars. Magic, like science, he states, affords many insights into the workings of the human brain, which he designates as the greatest wizard of all. Whether dealing with flying broomsticks, Quidditch, or Bertie Bott's Every Flavor Beans, Highfield demonstrates how Muggle science has a leg up on many of the phenomena in Harry's world.

From a BBC article, Potter magic charms Nokia chief:

[...] When mobile phone makers look for inspiration for future products, one would expect they look to science fiction. [/] [...] But Yrjo Neuvo, Chief Technical Officer of Nokia mobile phones, reads JK Rowling's Harry Potter to get him thinking. [/] [...] JK "is very good when it comes to predicting the future", according to Dr Neuvo, and "many of the things she is painting in her books can be implemented in phones in five to 10 years. It's really exciting," he says. [My ellipses and emphasis]

"A Girl's Guide to Gadgets" article link: Harry Potter should have swapped magic for technology - it would have been way easier

From a Use It.com article, In the Future, We'll All Be Harry Potter:

[...] The world of magic is a world where inanimate objects come alive; it's as if they had computational power, sensors, awareness, and connectivity. [/] By saying that we'll one day be like Harry Potter, I don't mean that we'll fly around on broomsticks or play three-dimensional ballgames (though virtual reality will let enthusiasts play Quidditch matches). What I do mean is that we're about to experience a world where spirit inhabits formerly inanimate objects.
Much of the Harry Potter books' charm comes from the quirky magic objects that surround Harry and his friends. Rather than being solid and static, these objects embody initiative and activity. This is precisely the shift we'll experience as computational power moves beyond the desktop into everyday objects.

Next-Generation Magic [/] Here are some examples of agency in Harry Potter's objects, and how we'll achieve similar powers in the future: [[From the article link page down for half a dozen detailed examples.]]

[...] Don't Harm the Muggles [/] Harry Potter's world resembles the world of computers in another way as well: In the Harry Potter books, the population consists of two distinct groups -- a small group of wizards, and a much larger group of Muggles (standard-issue humans) who know nothing about magic or the dealings of wizards.

[...] In the Harry Potter books, the ethical wizards have agreed to leave the Muggles alone and not do magic tricks on them. It seems that computer wizards have something to learn from Harry Potter, because they often use their power in ways that are harmful to regular people. [/] [...] . Designers who inflict poor usability on the world and its Muggles are wicked wizards indeed.

Six Day War Memories (40 Years Ago)

We live in the present. We look to the future. But we learn great truths from the past. -Madame Chaing Kai shek

Short, decisive wars can be a blessing. Exposing the boasting lies of dictators, shortening and minimizing suspense and suffering, providing a pause in the rumors of war, bringing peace, actually, for a time.

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a BBC NEWS article, Personal accounts of the war of 1967:

Personal accounts of the war of 1967 [/] Readers of the BBC website share their memories of the Arab Israeli war. [/] Published: 2007/06/06 07:06:59 GMT

SAMIA KHOURY, 73, PALESTINIAN, EAST JERUSALEM

We were living in Beit Hanina, a suburb north of Jerusalem. There was a Jordanian military camp right behind our house. [/] The Israeli planes raiding the area didn't realise that the Jordanian camp had been evacuated before the war had even begun. [/] One of the bombs fell directly on the strawberry bed in our garden, breaking our living room window.

It was not really a six-day war. It was a 24-hour walk-through with minimal resistance. Almost overnight the whole population was facing a new reality. [/] We were under a military occupation, and to add insult to injury we had to put up a white piece of cloth as a sign of surrender. [/] We just stood helpless, not realising what we were up against. [/] In fact our anger was focused on the Arab armies who lost the war on three fronts, and on Jordan specifically for abandoning the area before the fighting had started.

MOSHE, 67, ISRAELI, JERUSALEM

At about 10am we heard a rumour that the Egyptian air force had been destroyed. [/] To be at the Wailing Wall; it was a dream for us! [/] I was doing my military service, working as a technician for the air force. Of course I knew the reservists were already called up; but I didn't have the feeling war was imminent.

No-one believed it would be so easy. Suddenly we had a big Israel with all the sites of the Bible. [/] On the sixth day of war we said "Let's go the Wailing Wall". I hadn't been there before, not to East Jerusalem. [/] Before 1967, there was a viewpoint from which you could see the Wailing Wall; I remember my father pointing it out to me as a child.

You must understand, this was only 22 years after the Holocaust. Remembering my family members who were killed ... and then to be at the wall; it was a dream for us! The history of 2,000 years was coming back!

After the war, there was enormous prosperity in Israel; people started to invest in the country. Jews came from all over the world.

RAHAF, 68, SYRIAN, DAMASCUS

I remember it being quite a hot summer. I was 28 years old and alone with my four children in Quneitra, as my husband was quite close to the front. He was a member of the military police. [/] During the build-up, the media was very one-sided and patriotic. It was all about defeating Israel and gaining a victory for the Arab street, something that was very much needed. [/] You must understand, at the time Damascus was inundated with Palestinian refugees; their suffering was very evident and there was an animosity towards Israel that permeated through society; it still does.

There were a lot of rumours and the only way to determine how close the Israeli army actually was, was by word of mouth. [/] I was anxious and felt quite isolated; I could see my neighbours slowly closing up and leaving for Damascus. [/] My husband finally called me and told me to do the same, which I did. He followed about a week later.

I remember people thinking that Syria had fallen and soon the Israeli army would enter the gates of Damascus. [/] The media was very subdued and did not elaborate on our defeat. The nation went from a state of euphoria, to utter despondency. [/] It was the ultimate anti-climax, and I could see it etched clearly on my husband's face when he returned. He never spoke much of what he saw, as it would bring tears to his eyes, and he hated me seeing him cry.

FATHI SALAMEH, 47, PALESTINIAN, JENIN, WEST BANK

Jenin was under the protection of Jordanian and Iraqi troops at the time. There were just 30 or 40 kilometres between us and Israeli territory. [/] I was seven years old and I remember it all well. When they started to bomb us we hid in caves in the village. My family have horrible stories about what Israel did to our people in 1948. [/] So, we spent two or three nights in the caves without electricity or water.

It's a myth that it was a six day war; everything was finished in just 48 hours. [/] We were at the top of the mountain watching the Iraqis and Jordanians escape from the area. There was no unified command; they gave up the land very easily. [/] There were individual heroes who tried to resist. We watched one lone Iraqi tank stay on the hill and fire on the approaching Israeli tanks. He kept on firing and holding them back until an Israeli war plane flew in and bombed him.

The Jordanians didn't have the strength or weapons that the Israelis had and they didn't want to commit suicide. So, they went home to their families. [/] After we left the caves we went home too. Everyone in the village put white flags on their houses. [/] I'm now 47 and I've spent 40 years of my life under occupation.

GEORGE MUENZ, 52, CANADIAN/ISRAELI, VANCOUVER

I was 12 years old in 1967, living in Montreal. As the son of an Auschwitz survivor, this was initially a traumatic time for me and Jews in general. [/] I first heard about the war when I came into the kitchen for breakfast and my foster mother was crying. [/] I did not really understand war, but I sensed that we were in great danger. [/] I remember watching TV and seeing mobs in Cairo screaming "Itabch Al Yahud" - "Slaughter the Jews" and there was real fear that we were facing another holocaust.

The subsequent Israeli victory was a huge watershed in our lives, and in 1974 I moved to Israel and joined the Israeli Army.

ADNAN AWAMLAH, 58, JORDANIAN, JORDAN (From BBCArabic.com)

I was a student when the war broke out. We were expecting certain victory over Israel.

However, I woke up out of a series of dreams to a surprising and horrific reality. [/] These dreams were fuelled by the Arab leaders of the time and by the official media. They included a romantic desire to return Palestinian lands occupied by Israel; and another one of forming an unbeatable joint Arab army.

If there is one main consequence of the war, it could be that I lost confidence in Arab leaders. [/] I still remember King Hussein of Jordan promising Arab armies would "eat up Israelis with their hands and teeth" - words that later proved no more than rhetoric after Israel destroyed three Arab armies in a few hours.

I also can't forget my friends and relatives breaking down in tears after the defeat. [/] With all pre-war talk about certain victory, we just didn't expect to lose.

RONNIE DALLAL, 54, FORMERLY IRAQI JEW, NOW BRITISH CITIZEN

By 1967 there were only about 2,500 Jews left in Iraq. We kept ourselves to ourselves and were generally left alone; but things changed dramatically after the war. [/] I was 14 and went to the Jewish school where we tried to maintain a semblance of normal life despite the many restrictions imposed on us as Jews.

On the day it started, all I was aware of was parents coming to pick their children up. I couldn't understand what was happening. The mother of a friend told me war had started. [/] For the first few days of the war no-one knew what was happening. When the truth came out, we started being persecuted.

After this, Jews were not allowed to have 'phones, my brother couldn't go to university. In 1969 nine Jews were publicly hanged in Iraq for spying for Israel. We had our own ID to show we were Jewish. Guess what colour the card was: yellow. [/] I was 18 when I left; I was smuggled into Iran. I think the Jewish community in Iraq has dwindled to about 10.

NASHED RASHED, 53, EGYPTIAN/CANADIAN, CANADA

I was 13 years old at the time, living in Cairo. After 40 years the events are still fresh in my mind. [/] We used to live near a railway line connecting Cairo to Suez. Before the war you could see the heavy equipment being taken by rail from Cairo to Sinai, through Suez. [/] You could see the faces of the soldiers; they were singing and chanting as if they were going on a picnic.

After the war, the trains used to sneak back after midnight, carrying the wounded, the dead and the destroyed artillery. [/] It was such a shock to me and everyone else, but at the time we knew very little; neither when nor how the war ended, because all information was controlled by the Nasser regime. [/] More and more memories come to my mind, but they are all sad. We felt destroyed as a nation.

JOSEPHINE BACON, 65, BRITISH/ISRAELI, LONDON

For the first three days of the war we were told nothing by Israeli radio, we did not know if we were winning or losing. [/] I was living in Jerusalem with my husband, a reservist in the air force, and my baby daughter. [/] We lived opposite the head of news at Kol Israel, Israeli Radio, who was a friend of ours, but he would not tell us what was happening.

On the third day, people who had stayed at home started to venture out, as we realised the shelling had stopped. [/] When I went to buy groceries I saw a crowd of people had gathered. When I got closer, I saw they were crowding around a jeep with an Israeli soldier in it - but could see immediately from the camouflage that it was not an Israeli jeep! [/] Sure enough, there were the Arabic numerals on the number plate. That was the first time I knew we had won. [My ellipses and emphasis]

POLL J:) Test Fertility At Age 18?

Asking tomorrow's question today!!! --- A poll that takes you ahead of the curve.

See article below, and: Vote! Make your opinion (or lack thereof) count!! Vote at Adult Christian Forum Thread 113547!!!. (Choices and link also given after article below.)

From a New York Times article, At-Home Fertility Screening Available for Men:

At-Home Fertility Screening Available for Men [/] By RONI CARYN RABIN [/] June 4, 2007

Many men, faced with the prospect of going to the doctor for a fertility evaluation, will tell you: they would rather just stay home. [/] Now they can. [/] A new at-home screening test, called Fertell, lets couples find out if they have fertility problems without stepping into a doctor's office. The test has his and hers components - a screening test for men that is the first at-home device to measure the concentration of motile sperm, and a test for women that measures a hormone considered a marker of egg quality.

The availability of the two-in-one test helps drive home the message that both men and women can contribute to infertility, experts say. [/] "It takes two to have a baby, as silly as that sounds," said Dr. Harry Fisch, director of the Male Reproductive Center at New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center, who does not have a financial relationship with the maker of the test, Genosis Inc.

The test results could give couples early warning that they should see a doctor, Dr. Fisch said. "Couples often don't appreciate this," he said. "So many times the woman goes through all these tests, and the guy doesn't even have a semen analysis."

The test for the male requires a semen sample; it assesses the ability of sperm to swim through a solution similar to cervical mucus, as well as the number able to do so, said Dr. Keith B. Isaacson, an associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive biology at Harvard Medical School who is on the board of medical advisers at Genosis. Results are available in 80 minutes.

The female fertility test is a urine stick, much like a home pregnancy test, that measures the level of follicle stimulating hormone on the third day of the m%nstr%%l cycle. An abnormally high level is an indicator that the ovarian reserve, indicating egg quality, is low. The result is available in 30 minutes.

The tests are not definitive and do not substitute for a thorough professional evaluation. They screen for main problems, experts say, but will not pick up all fertility-related difficulties.

About one million American women seek medical help for fertility-related troubles each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The problem lies with the woman 40 percent of the time, with the man 40 percent of the time, and with both 20 percent of the time, experts say. [/] "Most people are surprised to hear that almost 50 percent of the time, it's a male factor," Dr. Isaacson said. [/] But, he added, women are still more likely to initiate treatment. "My guess is the female partner is the one who's going to buy this and encourage the guy to use it."

Fertell, which has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, goes on sale today. No prescription is necessary, and it is expected to cost around $100. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Poll Question: Test Fertility At Age 18? | Poll choices:

1. Yes. Why wait??? / 2. Yes. IQ tested earlier. / 3. Yes. Physical exams earlier. / 4. Yes. Driver's test earlier. / 5. Yes. Optimize future choices. / 6. Yes. Full disclosure before commitment. / 7. Yes. All of above. / 8. Yes. / 9. Possibly. / 10. Possibly. Depends on individual. / 11. Possibly. Male test procedure upsetting. / 12. Possibly. Female test procedure upsetting. / 13. No. / 14. No. Results may mislead. / 15. No. Trust providence. / 16. No. Love is the important thing. / 17. No. Distrust science. / 18. No opinion. Important issues deserve much study. / 19. No comment. / 20. No opinion. / 21. This poll is worthless. / 22. This poll is of negative value. / 23. Other.

Vote at Adult Christian Forum Thread 113547! Vote!! Make your opinion (or lack thereof) count!!!

POLL J:) The Submissive Christian Woman: A Myth?!?

See article below, and: Vote! Make your opinion (or lack thereof) count!! Vote at Christian AAA Bible Study Forum Thread 29708!!!. (Choices and link also given after article below.)

From an Amazon .com book description, The Myth Of The Submissive Christian Woman::

The Myth Of The Submissive Christian Woman: Walking with God without Being Stepped On by Others [/] by Brenda Waggoner

[...] Editorial Reviews [/] Book Description [/] Many women have been lured into trying to live out a mythical version of biblical submission. They appear authentic on the outside, but on the inside they're chained by misperceptions of the truth that skew their priorities and cause them to doubt themselves. The Myth of the Submissive Christian Woman is about living a life surrendered to Jesus by embracing God's gifts, offering them back to him, and passing them on to others. This book is about living truthfully and freely the abundant life Jesus has promised us as Christians.

From the Back Cover [/] The Myth of the Submissive Christian Woman [/] Walking with God without Being Stepped On by Others

God didn’t call you to be a doormat! [/] Yes, Scripture calls us to die to self—self-absorption, self-centeredness, self- righteousness, and self-indulgence—but nowhere does Scripture tell us to abandon all of the wonderful God-given gifts and talents that make us who we are.

In The Myth of the Submissive Christian Woman, author Brenda Waggoner dispels the myth that biblical submission requires that women reject who they are and become passive in their relationships with God and others. [/] Along the way, the author shatters the misconception that good manners, niceness, and passivity equal godliness and reveals that true biblical submission does not mean submitting to everyone else’s wants, needs, and opinions while ignoring your own. Instead, it means living truthfully by putting God first, submitting yourself to his will, and living your life according to what he desires.

[...] Spotlight Reviews [/] Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers. [/] Search Customer Reviews

** Must Read [/] [...] Where, oh where, was this book about 2 years ago when I was learning these lessons the hard way? Fortunately God brought someone into my life to teach me these things. It would have been so much easier if he could have just given me this book rather than spending months helping me sort out all of the inaccurate submissive ideas I had gotten over the years. [/] [...] The light came on for me and I will never go back to what it was. I think this book has the potential to turn the same light on for many women!

** The Myth of the Submissive Saint [/] This is a good book. My only problem with it is that it is written for women. I understand that Brenda Waggoner specializes in ministry to women and that this book would make a great study book for a ladies' reading group. I also understand that it touches on an area concerning women where there has been much erroneous teaching. However, it has been my experience that struggles with dominance and submission are not gender specific. Many women have control issues and many men are recessive. Also, while the majority of illustrations in this book are gender specific, the Scriptures, quotes, and outline certainly are not. This book would be of value to people of both sexes. Many people, both male and female, both dominant and recessive, could benefit from wrestling with the statements made in this book.

Customer Reviews [/] ** Finally I understand [/] [...] I always felt uneasy about this area in my christian walk, because I have seen and heard of many women trapped in marriages when submission is interpreted as "subservience". Submission has been a much abused principle, and much of the "abuse" happens in the body of Christ. This book opened my eyes, giving me the correct perspective on submission. It is a "must read" for persons involved in women's ministries, pastors and marriage counsellors, so that the correct perspective can be taught to both men and women. It is also a good gift for single women who are contemplating marriage, and for married women who have difficulty with "submission" as we know it. An EXCELLENT book, and the exercises at the end of each chapter allow for personal reflection.

** Not your ordinary Christian self-help [/] With passionate caring, Brenda Waggoner delves into a dense area of Christian struggle. Not just for women, and not just on the obvious topic suggested in the title, this book probes your heart. Going deeper than most self-help Christian books, you can receive guidance from Brenda if you are ready to spend real time with each chapter. She offers scripture to meditate upon, and questions that initiate your own inner exploration. Perhaps most importantly, she opens up her own life struggles to the reader. She comes to the book not just as the therapist that she is, but as the woman she is, who became the therapist. Highly recommended. [...] [My ellipses and emphasis]

Poll Question: The Submissive Christian Woman: A Myth?!? | Poll choices:

1. Yes. Like the Unicorn (and Alice) a Fabulous Monster! / 2. Yes. Male chauvinist trickery. / 3. Yes. Old Testament notion. / 4. Yes. Primitive tribal notion. / 5. Yes. Victorian era notion. / 6. Yes. Radical Middle East notion. / 7. Yes. Mistaken interpretation of scripture. / 8. Yes. / 9. Possibly. / 10. Possibly. Have not seen any. / 11. Possibly. But could exist, theoretically. / 12. Possibly. But miracles can happen. / 13. No. / 14. No. But "obedient" is a better term. / 15. No. But "properly subordinate" is a better term. / 16. No. But "appropriately loving" is a better term. / 17. No. Remember example of Sarah (1 Peter 3:5-6). / 18. No opinion. Important issues deserve much study. / 19. No comment. / 20. No opinion. / 21. This poll is worthless. / 22. This poll is of negative value. / 23. Other.

Vote at Christian AAA Bible Study Forum Thread 29708! Vote!! Make your opinion (or lack thereof) count!!!

POLL J:) Has Hillary Found Grace?

Hillary was convinced there would be grace in her life, and meanwhile, she would just carry on."

See rest of article below, and:

Vote! Make your opinion (or lack thereof) count!!

Vote at Christian AAA Bible Study Forum Thread 29706!!!. (Choices and link also given after article below.)

From a Washington Post article, Portrait of the Candidate as a Young Climber:

Portrait of the Candidate as a Young Climber [/] By Carl Bernstein [/] Sunday, June 3, 2007; B03

The most important man in Hillary Rodham Clinton's life during her years at Wellesley College was Don Jones, a Methodist youth minister whom she had known since 10th grade, when he rolled into her hometown of Park Ridge, Ill., driving a red Chevy Impala convertible and advocating justice and social reform.

By mail, he became her counselor, confessor, partner in Socratic debate and spiritual adviser. When depression struck in college, she turned to him, as she would for the next three decades, including the year of her husband's impeachment. He focused her on theologian Paul Tillich's sermon "You Are Accepted," in which he says that sin and grace coexist. "Grace strikes us when we are in great pain and restlessness," Tillich said. "It happens; or it does not happen." Hillary was convinced there would be grace in her life, and meanwhile, she would just carry on.

Since then, spiritual and quasi-spiritual axioms (some imbued with New Age jargon, others profound) have served as soothing balms in painful times; they would provide answers to questions that seemed otherwise confounding. These comforting postulations would also be used by Hillary to justify, often publicly, her or her husband's less palatable actions or aspects of character.

Peter Edelman, who knew Hillary before she met his wife-to-be, Marian Wright Edelman, thought Hillary's politics while in college "reflected what you would expect in a certain kind of young person at the time . . . sort of on the liberal side. She was opposed to the war in Vietnam, and she had a very instinctive interest in children's issues that had already manifested itself" before she graduated from Wellesley in 1969.

[...] One of Jones's letters to Hillary at Wellesley alluded to Edmund Burke's emphasis on personal responsibility and raised the question of "whether someone can be a Burkean realist about history and human nature and at the same time have liberal sentiments and visions." In her response, Hillary mused, "It is an interesting question you posed -- can one be a mind conservative and a heart liberal?" [/] No description of the adult Hillary Clinton -- a mind conservative and a heart liberal -- has so succinctly defined her as this premonitory observation at age 18. She believed it was possible, though difficult, to be both.

N.B.: One who is not a socialist before age 40 has no heart. One who is still a socialist after age 40 has no brain. - Prominent nineteenth century French statesman, I believe, modified to avoid sexism

Hillary's ambition was always to do good on a huge scale, and her nascent instinct, so visible at Wellesley, to mediate principle with pragmatism -- without abandoning basic beliefs -- seemed a powerful and plausible way to achieve it. Bill Clinton, too, wanted to do good, and on a grand scale, but his gaze had always been fixed at the ground level of practical politics. Hillary's looked heavenward, toward theologian John Wesley's message of service. Part of what Hillary brought to her union with Bill was an almost messianic sense of purpose, a high-mindedness and purity of vision that hovered above the conventionally political. Bill's political beliefs were strongly held, but "with Bill, you felt he just wanted to be president, whereas Hillary had this religious zeal," said a friend from their Yale Law School days. Hillary had seemed to believe since her adolescence that her life was an unending search to determine what was right and how to make it happen.

[...] But Hillary's is not the caricatured, b%tchy, b%ll-breaking toughness that their enemies like to attribute to her. She has almost always been much more thoughtful than they granted. It is more like a kind of military rigor: reading the landscape, seeing the obstacles, recognizing which ones are malevolent or malign, and taking expedient action accordingly.

[...] In Arkansas, she would not be a woman in charge--something she knew was not necessarily antithetical to being married but was antithetical to being married to Bill, on his turf. She would, by choice, inhabit the more traditional universe in which she would invest her talent, dedication and energy to brighten her man's star--as her mother's generation had done. She would be the partner, the manager, the adviser. She would follow her heart.

Carl Bernstein shared, with Bob Woodward, a Pulitzer Prize for their coverage of Watergate for The Washington Post. This article is adapted from his forthcoming book, "A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton." [/] Post a Comment [/] View all comments that have been posted about this article. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Un-Sponsored Link: For those, particularly husbands, who might want to purchase a discreetly assertive, $12, "Another Woman In Charge", coffee mug.

Poll Question: Has Hillary Found Grace? | Poll choices:
1. Yes. Magnificent moral role model for us all! / 2. Yes. Faith, Hope, and Love abound! / 3. Yes. Justice, Courage, Prudence and Moderation abound! / 4. Yes. Like the Magdalene, "She hath done what she could." / 5. Yes. All of the above! / 6. Yes. Much more evident in her than in most. / 7. Yes. More evident in her than most. / 8. Yes. / 9. Possibly. / 10. Possibly. Suffering in adversity is impressive. / 11. Possibly. Adherence to political creed is impressive. / 12. Possibly. She is impressive. / 13. No. / 14. No. Still waiting. / 15. No. Still looking. / 16. No. Still seeking. / 17. No. No clear testimony. / 18. No opinion. Important issues deserve much study. / 19. No comment. / 20. No opinion. / 21. This poll is worthless. / 22. This poll is of negative value. / 23. Other.
Vote at Christian AAA Bible Study Forum Thread 29706! Vote!! Make your opinion (or lack thereof) count!!!

POLL J:) Gaza: What Should Be Done?

See informed views in articles below, and: Vote! Make your opinion (or lack thereof) count!! Vote at Adult Christian Forum Thread 113392!!!. (Choices and link also given after articles below.)

From a Arutz Sheva articles:

Carpet Bomb Launch Sites: Former Chief Rabbi Calls to Carpet Bomb Launch Sites:

Former Chief Rabbi Calls to Carpet Bomb Launch Sites [/] 14 Sivan 5767, 31 May 07 04:19

(IsraelNN.com) Former Sephardi Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu has written a letter to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert calling on him to carpet bomb sites from which Kassam rockets are launched at Israeli towns. The areas should be bombed regardless of civilian casualties among the local Arab population, Rabbi Eliyahu said, explaining that Israel should do “whatever it takes to make them stop.”

Rabbi Eliyahu quoted biblical sources to show that the civilian population of Gaza is responsible for stopping the launch of Kassam rockets from their territory. As they do nothing to stop the rockets, he said, there is no moral prohibition against attacks that endanger their lives. According to Rabbi Eliyahu, the government has a moral obligation not to endanger the lives of IDF soldiers or Jewish residents of the western Negev in an attempt to avoid Arab casualties in Gaza. [My ellipses and emphasis]

"Cut Off All Connection": [[Avigdor (not Joe)]] Lieberman: Disengage from Gaza:

[[Avigdor (not Joe)]] Lieberman: Disengage from Gaza [/] 14 Sivan 5767, 31 May 07 04:52

(IsraelNN.com) Minister of Strategic Affairs Avigdor Lieberman will present a plan to the government on Thursday in response to rocket attacks from Gaza terrorists. [/] Lieberman proposes that Israel cut off all connection to Gaza, and begin to treat it as an enemy entity. “Participation in the axis of evil has a heavy price—financially, politically, and militarily,” Lieberman explained.

Among the steps Lieberman proposes are the complete closure of crossings between Gaza and the western Negev [[(Egypt)]], the bombing of Gaza neighborhoods in response to Kassam rocket attacks, and an end to diplomatic contact with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. Lieberman also recommends ending the flow of water, electricity, and gas to Gaza and the immediate cessation of visiting rights for family members of terrorist prisoners until the release of kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Be Prepared: Homefront Increases Wartime Preparations:

Homefront Increases Wartime Preparations [/] 14 Sivan 5767, 31 May 07 05:10

(IsraelNN.com) The Homefront Command has begun increasing its preparations for wartime scenarios, while reassuring the public that there is no concrete threat. The preparations include a public campaign telling Israelis what to do in case of an attack. “Our job is to prepare for an all-out war,” Colonel Hilik Sofer explained. [/] The Homefront Command has also begun more specific preparations in the south, and is preparing cities within 15 kilometers of Gaza for potential rocket attacks. Rocket warning systems have been set up in Netivot and Ashkelon, and residents of both cities have received pamphlets describing the proper response to an attack. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Cut and Run: Background: History of PA Shelling Against Israel:

Background: History of PA Shelling Against Israel [/] 14 Sivan 5767, 31 May 07 04:32 [/] by Hillel Fendel

(IsraelNN.com) On Jan 31, 2001, for the first time in the Oslo War, Arabs shot a mortar shell into Netzarim, a Jewish town in central Gaza. [/] [...] On April 3, in only the 5th or 6th mortar attack on Gush Katif, toddler Ariel Yered was critically wounded by shrapnel to his head. Israel retaliated, the terrorists increased their fire, and mortar shells quickly became a commonplace occurrence and lost their shock value - but not their lethal punch. On Nov. 24, reserve soldier Barak Madmon, 26, was killed outside Kfar Darom when a mortar shell hit his IDF outpost. [/] [...] Two weeks later, on Mar. 5, 2002, Sderot was first targeted: Two Kassam rockets hit a home in the Negev city, wounding three children.

[...] Between the time the first shell hit Gush Katif and the time Sharon made his initial Disengagement announcement, almost three years passed. If it took less than three years of mortar attacks against Jewish Gaza for Israel's government to come up with the idea of running away, how long will it take for the "Convergence Plan" in Judea and Samaria to be taken out of its deep freeze? [My ellipses and emphasis]

Poll Question: Gaza: What Should Be Done? | Poll choices:

1. Follow the Oslo accords. / 2. Follow the Roadmap. / 3. Let the Quartet mediate. / 4. Let the United Nations mediate. / 5. Let the Arab League mediate. / 6. Let Syria mediate. / 7. Let Iran mediate. / 8. Let any or all of 3 thru 7 above mediate. / 9. Redeploy to Okinawa. / 10. Cut and run. / 11. Be prepared. / 12. Hold Bush fully responsible! / 13. Cut off all connection. / 14. Destroy Infrastructure (Like Clinton in Serbia). / 15. Military occupation. / 16. Carpet bombing. / 17. 'Cry "Havoc!", and let slip the dogs of war!' / 18. No opinion. Important issues require much study. / 19. No comment. / 20. No opinion. / 21. This poll is worthless. / 22. This poll is of negative value. / 23. Other.

Vote at Adult Christian Forum Thread 113392! Vote!! Make your opinion (or lack thereof) count!!!

Saved By Grace Through Faith

{{___ \\There is no justification for sinful men except by faith.//}}

The teaching is usually expressed by the phrase "justification by faith", and Warfield uses the familiar expression. More precise: "Saved by grace (unmerited favor) through faith."

The foundation of individual salvation is the unmerited favor of God.

The instrument of individual salvation is God-given, born-of-God, freely available, miraculous faith.

* God given: Ephesians 2:8-10 KJV For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: (9) Not of works, lest any man should boast. (10) For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

* Born-of-God: 1 John 5:4-5 KJV For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. (5) Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

* Freely available: Revelation 22:17 KJV And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

* Miraculous: Romans 8:16 KJV The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

{{___ Whose faith justifies us, the faith of Jesus Christ or our faith?

{{___ Gal.2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.}}

There is no preposition "of:" in the Greek text. The genitive case of the noun makes the insertion of a preposition necessary for good English. "Of" is often inserted in literal translations as the best general-purpose preposition available. The sense from context in this passage indicates that "in" should be used here. Even some of the most literal translations use "in".

Galatians 2:16 ASV yet knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we believed on Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the law: because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Galatians 2:16 LITV knowing that a man is not justified by works of Law, but that it is through faith in Jesus Christ (we also believed into Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of Law, because all flesh will not be justified by works of Law). Psa. 123:2

Note also the prepositions after "believed" in these translations: "on" / "into" rather than "in Christ Jesus". The Greek preposition used here indicates "the point reached or entered" according to Strong.

U.S. Babies Face Big Time Debts!?!

Why should we do anything for posterity?

What has posterity ever done for us?

- Sir Boyle Roche, "father" of Irish bulls, and author of this archetypical example

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a USA Today print edition news article, Liability $516,348 per U.S. household:

Rules 'hiding' trillions in debt [/] Liability $516,348 per U.S. household [/] By Dennis Cauchon [/] USA TODAY

The federal government recorded a $1.3 trillion loss last year — far more than the official $248 billion deficit — when corporate-style accounting standards are used, a USA TODAY analysis shows.

The loss reflects a continued deterioration in the finances of Social Security and government retirement programs for civil servants and military personnel. The loss — equal to $11,434 per household — is more than Americans paid in income taxes in 2006.

"We're on an unsustainable path and doing a great disservice to future generations," says Chris Chocola, a former Republican member of Congress from Indiana and corporate chief executive who is pushing for more accurate federal accounting.

Modern accounting requires that corporations, state governments and local governments count expenses immediately when a transaction occurs, even if the payment will be made later.

The federal government does not follow the rule, so promises for Social Security and Medicare don't show up when the government reports its financial condition.

Bottom line: Taxpayers are now on the hook for a record $59.1 trillion in liabilities, a 2.3% increase from 2006. That amount is equal to $516,348 for every U.S. household. By comparison, U.S. households owe an average of $112,043 for mortgages, car loans, credit cards and all other debt combined.

Unfunded promises made for Medicare, Social Security and federal retirement programs account for 85% of taxpayer liabilities. State and local government retirement plans account for much of the rest.

This hidden debt is the amount taxpayers would have to pay immediately to cover government's financial obligations. Like a mortgage, it will cost more to repay the debt over time. Every U.S. household would have to pay about $31,000 a year to do so in 75 years.

The Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Board, which sets federal accounting standards, is considering requiring the government to adopt accounting rules similar to those for corporations. The change would move Social Security and Medicare onto the government's income statement and balance sheet, instead of keeping them separate.

The White House and the Congressional Budget Office oppose the change, arguing that the programs are not true liabilities because government can cancel or cut them.

Chad Stone, chief economist at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, says it can be misleading to focus on the government's unfunded liabilities because Medicare's financial problems overwhelm the analysis.

"There is a shortfall in Medicare and Medicaid that is potentially explosive, but that is related to overall trends in health care spending," he says. [My ellipses and emphasis]

China Tops In Class Action Videos?!?

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

You Tube .com Video Link: the beijing student hit teacher (Hat tip - Drudge)

From a Breitbart .com AFP article, China aghast at video of students abusing teacher:

China aghast at video of students abusing teacher [/] May 29 03:21 AM US/Eastern

A video of two students abusing a 70-year-old teacher has created an Internet controversy in China and brought the morals of the nation's youths into question, state press said Tuesday.

The video, shot by a student at a Beijing school a week ago, shows a boy sporting an earring approach his teacher and slam the man's hat down over his face before returning to his seat, the Beijing News reported.

Later another boy threw a plastic bottle at the teacher as students in the classroom burst out laughing, it said.

The five-minute video was later posted on a blog and picked up by numerous websites, drawing angry outbursts from web surfers shocked at the audacity of the Chinese youths.

Some even went to the school to reprimand the students and express support for the professor, the paper said.

The professor, Sun Xingmao, who teaches history, politics and geography at the vocational school, did not want to discuss the incident, saying the students had already apologised and been excused, it said.

To many Chinese, the incident is likely to act as an uncomfortable reminder of the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution, which saw similar scenes of students humiliating and beating up their teachers. [My ellipses and emphasis]

More Desecration In Blue States!!!

Memorial Day Veterans' Grave Flag Burning Continues In Blue States!!!

Left Coast "Improvement": Flags Replaced By Swastikas On Veteran's Graves!!!

Thread on earlier incident near Boston: Flag Burners & Solarized Trash?!?

My prescient ("Tune in tomorrow") take on that incident:

A story that asks the question:

Are Flag Burners More Prevalent In the Vicinity of Half-Million-Dollar Solar-Powered Trash Compactors?!?

Inquiring minds want to know!!!

Tune in tomorrow (or whenever) for more of the continuing farcical saga of Third Millennium Blue State Tribulations.

Always remembering that there is a Dark Side to The Farce!!!

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a Breitbart .com article, Flags Replaced With Swastikas in Wash.:

Flags Replaced With Swastikas in Wash. [/] May 29 01:54 AM US/Eastern

ORCAS ISLAND, Wash. (AP) - Vandals burned dozens of small American flags that decorated veterans' graves for Memorial Day and replaced many of them with hand-drawn swastikas, authorities said Monday.

Forty-six flag standards were found empty and another 33 flags were in charred tatters Sunday in the cemetery, authorities said. Swastikas drawn on paper appeared where 14 of the flags had been. [/] Members of the American Legion on this island off Washington's northwest coast replaced the burned flags with new ones Sunday afternoon.

The vandals struck again on Memorial Day after a guard left at dawn, the San Juan County sheriff's office said. This time, the vandals left 33 of the hand-drawn swastikas.

"This is not an act of free speech. This is a crime," Sheriff Bill Cumming said in a statement released Monday afternoon. [/] Investigators believe there's more than one culprit, based on the number of flags that were vandalized, Cumming said in a telephone interview. But authorities have no suspects, he said. [/] The sheriff said deputies were trying to lift fingerprints off what little physical evidence they were able to recover. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Legal Abortion: Kinder, Gentler?!?

Or is it only the cover up that has improved?

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a Breitbart .com article, Top Cannes award for harrowing Romanian abortion film:

Top Cannes award for harrowing Romanian abortion film [/] May 27 02:26 PM US/Eastern

A devastating Romanian film on back-alley abortion and daily despair in the communist era Sunday won the Cannes film festival's top award, the Palme d'Or.

"4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days" by director Cristian Mungiu was handed the coveted prize at a glittering red-carpet ceremony marking the 60th anniversary of the world's paramount filmfest. [/] "It looks a little bit to me like (a) fairytale," a softly spoken Mungui said, adding that the triumph showed "you don't necessarily need big budgets and big stars to make stories."

The film, titled after the age of the aborted [[baby]] in the movie, stunned hardened festival veterans and was a favourite for the prize among the 22 films in the competition.

Film industry bible Variety called the film a revelation.

"Pitch perfect and brilliantly acted, '4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days' is a stunning achievement, helmed with a purity and honesty that captures not just the illegal abortion story at its core but the constant, unremarked negotiations necessary for survival in the final days of the Soviet bloc," reviewer Jay Weissberg wrote. [/] A low-budget movie produced with less than 600,000 euros (808,000 dollars), it is 39-year-old Mungiu's second feature and also highlights the role of friendship in daily survival in communist Nicolae Ceaucescu's Romania. [/] In the movie Gabita (Laura Vasiliu), a timid student in a small town, is desperate to terminate her mid-term pregnancy at a time when abortion is illegal but almost anything could be bought on the black market.

Mungiu offers a shocking image of the aborted [[baby]], but it is the abortionist's graphic description of the process and his chilling exploitation of the women's dilemma that make for particularly excruciating viewing. [/] Mungiu said he aimed to capture the bleak environs of late 1980s Romania. [/] "Because of the pressure of the regime, women and families were so much concerned about not being caught for making an illegal abortion that they didn't give one minute of thought about the moral issue," he told reporters. [/] "It was either you or them getting you for what you did."

He put the [[aborted baby]] on screen to serve as a reminder to audiences. "It makes a point -- people should be aware of the consequences of their decisions," he said. [My ellipses and emphasis and double bracketed politically incorrect word substitutions.]

Flag Burners & Solarized Trash?!?

A story that asks the question:

Are Flag Burners More Prevalent In the Vicinity of Half-Million-Dollar Solar-Powered Trash Compactors?!?

Inquiring minds want to know!!!

Tune in tomorrow (or whenever) for more of the continuing farcical saga of Third Millennium Blue State Tribulations.

Always remembering that there is a Dark Side to The Farce!!!

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a The Boston Channel .com news article, Police Search For Flag Burner:

Police Search For Flag Burner [/] Solar Collector Worth $500,000 [/] POSTED: 1:35 pm EDT May 25, 2007 [/] UPDATED: 6:59 pm EDT May 25, 2007

*** Video: Flags Burned [[(Click on picture, then play button.)]]

BOSTON -- Natick police said they were searching for whomever stuffed decorative American flags in trash receptacles around the town square and set them on fire. [/] Authorities said an off-duty officer noticed a trash receptacle on fire in a Natick park near the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority station at about 4 p.m. on Thursday.
"I will tell you -- I was very, very upset about this. This area, this park, Moran Park, is considered sacred ground by the veterans here in Natick," veteran John MacGillivray said. [/] By Friday afternoon, the 12 flags had been replaced. [/] "I am aware that people have a right to protest, but they don’t have a right to take property that doesn’t belong to them and that's here to honor the veterans. It is a disgrace," MacGillivray said.

The burning flags were in a solar-powered trash compactor, which is valued at about $500,000. [/] "It had to be purposefully set. It is probably not that uncommon to have trash on fire, but it is a little more uncommon to find flags," said Natick Police Lt. Brian Grassey.

Natick veterans said it was especially disrespectful to burn the flags days before Memorial Day weekend. [/] "We decorate this park every Memorial Day. We have never had anything like this happen," said veteran Bob White.

Those responsible for the vandalism face felony charges for destruction of property for destroying the flags and damaging the trash compactors. [/] "Perhaps they should be cleaning up this park or something along that nature. If it is young kids, they need to be made aware of the consequences of their actions," MacGillivray said.

A veterans group said it would properly dispose of the flags. [/] Police are asking for help finding the person responsible for burning the flags. They ask anyone with information to call them at 508-647-9500. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Pot Calling Kettle Sooty*?!?

* Word in ancient adage changed in order to avoid the commission of a hate crime.

N.B. Serious climate scientists have essentially charged Vice President Gore with promoting "trivialities and nonsense" in his expedition** against global warming.

** Word changed in order to avoid the commission of a hate crime against the co-religionists of the adversaries of the great "expeditions"** of the period 1095-1291.

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

Former US vice president Al Gore on Friday criticized the "trivialities and nonsense" of celebrity gossip in the media and called on people to focus instead on issues like Iraq and climate change.

Gore, who is promoting his new book "The Assault on Reason," made the comments at a book signing in New York, where he was treated to a rock star reception by more than 1,300 cheering and screaming fans.

From a Breitbart .com article, Al Gore slams 'trivialities and nonsense' in news media, more follows:

Al Gore slams 'trivialities and nonsense' in news media [/] May 25 05:03 PM US/Eastern

[...] "What is it about our collective decision-making process that has led us to this state of affairs where we spend much more time in the public forum talking about -- or receiving information about -- Britney Spears shaving her head or Paris Hilton going to jail?" Gore asked. [/] He lamented what he described as the "destruction of the boundary between news and entertainment" and said the United States was "vulnerable as a democracy to mass and continuing distraction." [/] His new book draws parallels between the US government's approaches to climate change and the war in Iraq. [/] "Just like the facts available before the invasion of Iraq, these facts about the climate crisis have been repeatedly brushed aside and ignored as inconvenient," he said. "In both cases the facts were ignored."

Since losing the US presidential election in 2000, Gore has become a full-time global warming campaigner -- a path he says he intends to continue treading despite speculation that he could run for the White House in 2008. [/] Gore was recently nominated for a Nobel Peace Price for his work in drawing attention to climate change, while the film he helped make of his best-selling global warming book "An Inconvenient Truth" earlier this year won an Oscar. [My ellipses and emphasis]

"Honor Grads, Dis Card"?!?

- Sign held by irate new University of Massachusetts graduate

Faculty and students ask the question:

Why honor a man who spent six years as Chief of Staff to the Most Evil Man (so far) of the Third Millennium?!?

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a Hosted AP dynamic stories article, via Access North G[eorgi]a .com, Former Bush Aide Card Is Booed at UMass:

Former Bush Aide Card Is Booed at UMass [/] May 25, 8:36 PM EDT

AMHERST, Mass. (AP) -- President Bush's former chief of staff Andrew Card was loudly booed by hundreds of students and faculty members as he rose to accept an honorary degree at the University of Massachusetts on Friday.

The boos and catcalls - including those from faculty members who stood onstage with Card - drowned out Provost Charlena Seymour's remarks as she awarded the honorary doctorate in public service. Protesters claim Card lied to the American people in the early days of the Iraq war and should not have been honored at the graduate student commencement.

Card smiled slightly while Seymour spoke and raised his hand in thanks, then sat down without speaking. [/] Afterward he ignored a reporter's question about the protesters. "It was a great honor and a privilege to be here," he said.

The protests were mainly contained to an area in the back of the campus arena, though many of the faculty members onstage joined the three- to four- minute outburst. [/] One faculty member onstage held a sign: "Card - no honor, no degree." Another sign said, "War criminals go home."

Chancellor John Lombardi declined to comment on the protests or Card's honorary degree. [/] Before the commencement ceremony, about 100 faculty members and students sang anti-war songs, handed out leaflets and waved signs outside the arena.

Sigrid Schmalzer, an assistant professor of history, said she believes Card was honored because he's well-connected and UMass thought he could somehow help the school. [/] "For the university to so cynically disregard the question of intellectual integrity when it becomes convenient to pursue money and power is the wrong message to send," she said.

Card, a former Massachusetts lawmaker who received his undergraduate degree at the University of South Carolina, has said he was honored to be selected and is a supporter of UMass. [/] Opponents tried unsuccessfully for days leading up to the ceremony to get the university to change its mind. [/] "Andrew Card was Bush's chief of staff from 2000 to 2006. By about 2004, he should be saying, 'Look, either these policies change, or I'm going to resign,'" said economics instructor John Stifler. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Rights Activists Betraying Civilization?!?

Say it ain't so, Joe Amnesty!

(With profuse apologies to Shoeless Joe Jackson, the Chicago White Socks, and Major League Baseball.)

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a New York Post article, HUMAN WRONGS & THE ACTIVISTS WHO LOVE THEM:

HUMAN WRONGS & THE ACTIVISTS WHO LOVE THEM [/] by Ralph Peters [/] May 25, 2007 -- HOW many "human-rights activists" does it take to betray civilization?

[[Picture Caption:]] [[Pseudo-Sacred North Korean Dictator]] Kim: Not as nasty as U.S., says Amnesty.

After the Fatah al-Islam terrorists holed up in a Palestinian camp carried out a wave of bombings, bank robberies and assassinations, Lebanon's struggling democratic government ordered its army to stop them. The Palestinian refugees themselves applauded the army's efforts, stating that few of the terrorists were local and most were fanatics from other Muslim states. The terrorists ruled with the gun and sought to enforce Sharia law. Their victims want them gone.

The response from Human Rights Watch? Ignore the crimes of the terrorists and criticize the Lebanese army for attacking them "indiscriminately."

That would be travesty enough for one week, but it was only a sideshow. Each year, Amnesty International releases what purports to be an objective global survey of the state of human rights. Sounds like a great idea, but the report has long since degenerated into an effort to protect terrorists and mass murderers from justice - and bash America.

In its latest report, Amnesty International denounces the United States again. This time, it seems we're the foremost global abuser of human rights.

Oh, if you keep reading, rogue states such as Zimbabwe, China, Sudan, Russia and Iran get tut-tut mentions, although North Korea just sounds like a weight-loss spa. Except for our democratic ally, Colombia, only the United Kingdom appears remotely as savage as the United States.

Reading about American heartlessness made me want to move to Saudi Arabia, where women never see their rights abused and believers of every faith are free to worship. And if I want a beer, I can hop over to Venezuela, where everything's free.

The sad truth is that the misnamed "human-rights community" just may be the worst enemy of human rights without a country of its own. There are real human-rights tragedies unfolding every day, from Harare to Havana, but activists don't give a d%m% about the average Joe or Miguel or Ali.

It's all about saving celebrity mass-murderers. And their advocates' Freudian issues with Uncle Sam. Guantanamo is one of the world's best-run prisons, where terrorists are treated all too indulgently. But to hear the human-rights charlatans, you'd think we were the SS at Babi Yar.

And don't forget that wicked-beyond-all-wickedness criminal state, Israel. Thank God we have men and women of conscience to defend the freedom fighters who launch rockets blindly into Israeli cities or massacre children as a legitimate form of protest.

We, the human race, can't afford this nonsense. Human rights matter. But conservatives abandoned the issue to leftist ideologues - and those of us caught in the middle have no public voice to speak for us. Meanwhile, the world is screaming in agony, while the high priests of human-rights just want to spit in Washington's face (knowing we won't spit back).

How can anyone who pretends to have a conscience attack the United States for violating human rights and engaging in "fear-mongering," while looking away as millions of Zimbabweans live on the brink of starvation in a police-state, hundreds of thousands lie dead in Darfur, all of North Korea makes Guantanamo look like Martha's Vineyard - and Islamist fanatics kill tens of thousands of Muslims?

Apart from the fact that there really are things worth fearing in this world, all that matters to the human-rights phonies is that, if you twist things sufficiently, you can blame America for the Muslim victims of Muslim terrorism.

And I keep missing the mass demonstrations against female circumcision, in which little girls and young women endure unspeakable agony as each has her clitoris sliced away. Guess that's just a quaint expression of cultures uncorrupted by the West.

Human rights shouldn't be an issue of the political left or right. We should all be in this fight together. But to make meaningful progress, you have to take on the butchers who prey upon the masses - as we've tried to do in Iraq. Activists prefer protecting the killers.

Don't any of those sanctimonious human-rights advocates pause to consider what they're doing to hundreds of millions of their fellow human beings when they suggest that the paramount threat to human rights comes from the United States? How do they rationalize all the slaughter, rape, real torture and starvation-as-a-policy they ignore to embarrass Washington?

The defense of the human rights of the innocent masses is the single most serious issue of our time, embedded in every other strategic threat. It's just a d%m%ed shame that the human-rights activists aren't serious.

Ralph Peters' latest book is "Never Quit The Fight." [My ellipses and emphasis]

Seat Belts Good; Big Government Bad!?!

Live Free or Die!!! - New Hampshire Official State Motto

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a New Hampshire Union Leader Page 1 Editorial by the Publisher, Seatbelts good; big government force is bad:

Page 1 Editorial: Seatbelts good; big government force is bad [/] By JOSEPH W. MCQUAID [/] New Hampshire Union Leader Publisher [/] Tuesday, Apr. 3, 2007

Adults who don't bother to use a seatbelt each and every time they enter an automobile are either not thinking clearly or don't have the capacity to think at all.

Elected officials who presume to understand and speak for the Live Free or Die state aren't thinking clearly if they vote to have the government force people to buckle up. That vote is scheduled in the House tomorrow and it looks like it may pass.

Seatbelts are good for you. But you are more likely to die from too much fat in your diet. Why isn't the Legislature telling us what we can and cannot eat? Don't laugh. That may be next.

New Hampshire has shown steady improvement in seatbelt usage and still kept Big Government at bay. That will change tomorrow with this bill, which would allow police to pull you over and fine you if they see that you are not belted up.

Is that the New Hampshire way? Do we want our small government to go down the slippery slope that leads to more and more orders and less and less liberty? That's what this vote is really all about. New Hampshire citizens will be watching it closely. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Have We Raised A Generation Of Narcissists???

It's 10 p.m. Do you know how big your child's ego is???

My take is that the hypocritical praise of posterity is the result of actions that demonstrate lack of actual and proper provision for posterity, starting with family planning.

They say that we should pass this bill for the sake of posterity. I say, "Why should we do anything for posterity. What has posterity ever done for us?" - Archetypical (and historical) Irish bull

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

From a Reason Magazine article, Have We Raised A Generation Of Narcissists?:

Have We Raised A Generation Of Narcissists? [/] It's 10 p.m. Do you know how big your child's ego is? [/] Steve Chapman | May 21, 2007

Growing older has many drawbacks and one unalloyed pleasure: passing judgment on the younger generation. Lately, people have been scrutinizing the members of Generation Y and finding them deficient. [/] What's wrong with the kids? A recent article in The Wall Street Journal reported that because they have been told since infancy that they were special, they believe it and expect to keep hearing it. "Bosses, professors and mates are feeling the need to lavish praise on young adults, particularly twenty-somethings, or else see them wither under an unfamiliar compliment deficit," it said.

To critics, this generation is an army of self-absorbed narcissists with a swollen sense of entitlement. In my house, I have tried to prevent this outcome by reminding my kids, "The world does not revolve around you. It revolves around me." But apparently some parents didn't dispense that wisdom. [/] Jean Twenge, an associate professor of psychology at San Diego State University, reports that college students increasingly agree with statements indicating oversized egos, such as "I am an important person." Marian Salzman, a senior vice president at the advertising agency JWT, told The Christian Science Monitor, "Gen-Y is the most difficult workforce I've ever encountered," because they "are so self-indulgent."

But before Gen Y-ers start to feel bad about themselves, they should know that worse things were said about their parents. Back in the 1960s and '70s, it was universal wisdom that the kids of that era suffered from too much coddling. Vice President Spiro Agnew blamed student unrest and other problems on "spoiled brats who never had a good spanking."[My ellipses and emphasis]

U.S. Borders: White Flagged?!?

A people who lack the courage to have children!

And who lack the courage to win wars!!

Will also lack the courage ---

To defend themselves against massive alien infiltration!!!

Have all the cheese eating surrender monkeys abandoned France and gotten themselves elected to the U.S. Congress?!?

I report and link. You decide. - J :)

"Every person who has ever risked their life securing our borders is extremely disheartened to see some of our elected representatives once again waving the white flag on the issues of illegal immigration and border security," National Border Patrol Council President T.J. Bonner said. [/] "Rewarding criminal behavior has never induced anyone to abide by the law, and there is no reason to believe the outcome will be any different this time," he said. [My ellipses and emphasis]

From the leadership of all 11,000 nonsupervisory U.S. Border Patrol agents in regard to the current bi-partisan immigration deal. Quoted, by Jerry Seper in a Washington Times article, Border agents hit illegals bill:

Also consider a Mark Steyn Chicago Sun-Times column, Capitulation, from A------ to Z:

Capitulation, from A------ to Z [/] May 20, 2007 [/] MARK STEYN

Are you a fine upstanding member of the Undocumented-American community? That's to say, are you (if you'll forgive the expression) an illegal immigrant?

Great news! Being illegal is now perfectly legal! Just for being one of the circa 12 million people who shouldn't be here, you can now be here indefinitely! If you were living and working in America illegally before Jan. 1, 2007, you're now entitled to one of the new Z-1 "probationary" visas. And your parents and spouses are entitled to one of the new Z-2 visas, and your children to the new Z-3 visas.

Don't worry: It's not an "amnesty." Every politician in America is opposed to amnesty -- if not the concept, then at least the word. That's why the visa starts with the letter that's furthest away from the one "amnesty" begins with. "Z" stands for zellout . . . no, hang on, zurrender or Zapatista, or some other word way up the other end of the alphabet from "amnesty." But the point is, at a stroke there will be no more illegal immigrants. Because being illegal means you're now legal.

Unless, of course, you came to America after Jan. 1, 2007, and thus aren't covered by the zamnesty. But in that case why not apply for the Z-1 anyway? After all, you're here illegally so how would U.S. Immigration know when you arrived? Especially with 12-15-20 million urgent applications tossed in on top of what's already a multi-year backlog. They're not exactly going to be doing a lot of in-depth background checks, especially not for a visa category whose only entry requirement under U.S. law is that you've broken U.S. law when you entered.

By the way, when I said "came to America," if you're visiting Toronto for a weekend break from Yemen or Belarus, don't be deterred by the fact that Canada is not technically in America. Why not just head down to Buffalo and apply for the old Z-1, too? After all, it's not such a stretch to regard every single person on the planet as a Z-1-in-waiting. This being America, pretty soon -- a court decision here, a court decision there -- the presumption of every school district and hospital and welfare administrator will be that they're obliged to treat everyone who walks in through the door as if they were a Z-1. You zee one, you've zeen 'em all.

As for the notion that dumping a population the size of four mid-size European Union nations into the lap of America's arthritic "legal immigration" (please, no tittering; apparently, there is still such a thing) bureaucracy will lead to tougher enforcement and rigorous scrutiny and lots of other butch-sounding stuff, well, if that were the case, there wouldn't be a problem in the first place. You can declare that "illegal" now mean "legal" very easily; to mandate that "incompetent" now means "competent" is a tougher proposition.

But, as John McCain declared, "This is what the legislative process is all about" -- and in the sense that it's a sloppily drafted bottomless pit of unintended consequences on a potentially cosmic scale whose sweeping "reforms" will inevitably require even more sweeping reforms of the reforms in a year or two's time, he's quite right. Also, as Senator McCain says, "This is what bipartisanship is all about."

I'm not a fan of "bipartisanship" for its own sake. This is a very divided political culture in which bipartisanship is all but nonexistent on everything else, starting with war and national security. So, when the political class is in lockstep bipartisan mode, that's sufficiently unusual all by itself. When it's in bipartisan mode on an issue on which the public is diametrically opposed, that looks less like bipartisanship and more like the lockstep myopia of an out-of-touch one-party state.

[...] Those figures would have stunned any Long Island school superintendent of 40 years ago. Derbyshire's numbers suggest that at some point not far away, every school board in America will have to factor in bilingual education programs and ever swelling special ed budgets, making one of the highest cost-per-pupil/lowest scores-per-pupil education systems even more expensive and even less educational.

At some point, it's worth trying to climb over the rubble of the 2007 Z-1s and the 1986 amnesty and the 1965 immigration act, and going back to basics: What is immigration for? In the modern Western world, to question immigration in even the most cautious way is to risk being demonized as a racist. Most of us like to see ourselves as nice people, and so even to raise the subject of immigration -- even illegal immigration -- feels like an assault not on distant foreigners so much as on our self-image. Yet, whatever the virtuousness of immigration for the host society, a dependence on it is a sign of profound structural weakness, and, when all the self-congratulation about celebrating diversity has died down, that weakness ought to be understood as such. The unspoken premise behind this bill is that the socioeconomic order in America is now so dependent on the vast apparatus of a giant shadow state of illegal immigrants that it cannot be dismantled but only legitimized and thereby expanded. If that is true, that is a basic structural defect that should be addressed honestly.

Meanwhile, the reluctance of Washington to be seen to enforce its own borders is very perplexing. From the "Washington sniper" to 9/11, there has been for a generation a clear national-security component to the illegal immigration issue. To present it only as a matter of "the jobs Americans won't do" is lazily reductive. The economists may see the vast human tide as an army of much-needed hotel maids and farm workers and nurses and plumbers, but to assume that everyone on the planet sees themselves as primarily an economic entity is complacent and (post-Sept. 11) obtusely deluded. The political class' urge to capitulate on the integrity of the national border sends as important a message to the world about American will as their urge to capitulate on Iraq. [My ellipses and emphasis]