U.N. Said Not Protecting Sudan Refugees

article

The United Nations is failing to protect millions of people displaced by conflict in Sudan's Darfur region and violence in other hotspots around the world, a U.N. report said Friday.

The world body's approach to the problem of people who have fled their homes but not crossed any international borders "is still largely ad hoc and driven more by the personalities and convictions of individuals on the ground than by an institutional, systemwide agenda," the report said.

The U.N.'s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think tank, compiled the 102-page study.

Dennis McNamara, head of OCHA's refugee division, said there is no single U.N. agency that deals with providing assistance for the 25 million internally displaced people around the world.

More than 1.8 million people are estimated to have been driven from their homes in the 21-month-old Darfur conflict.
[...]
Three different U.N. agencies have staff in Darfur, but their access to the displaced and their activity there have frequently been limited because Sudan's government has at times been reluctant to allow outside involvement, McNamara said.

The Sudanese government is allowing the United Nations access to camps in Darfur...

Actually, the government is blocking access whenever possible, and has forcibly relocated refugee camps with the use of tear gas and guns. One such evacuation happened on the day Sudan signed a cease-fire, and was actually the second such attempt in about two weeks at the camp. Plus, the Sudanese government will not allow the construction of roads to Sudan, thus forcing relief efforts to use incredibly expensive airplanes. The government claims that it wants to build trains, which take years, and would actually be of little use because of the nature of trains compared to hte nature of cars. Trains can move a lot over a long distance, but not distribute supplies because trains can follow only simple tracks; cars can distribute but have difficulty over great distance, because of hte agility of roads and cars. But, that's a bit of off-topic discussion for another time.

I'll continue with the quote (from exactly where left off):
...but U.N. activity is still limited by a lack of staff and funding. That shortage means the world body has been unable to provide AIDS tests and psychological counseling for rape victims in Darfur's camps, which McNamara called unacceptable.

McNamara said people displaced by fighting in conflict zones in Colombia and northern Uganda are also not getting the U.N. help they need.

"Darfur is only the most dramatic and highly publicized example," McNamara said. "It is by no means the biggest or the longest-lasting."

In a separate conflict in the south of Sudan, where warring parties are striving to reach a peace accord after two decades of fighting, there may be up to three times as many internally displaced people as in Darfur, he said.

Northern Uganda has three times as many internal refugees as Darfur, and an estimated 20,000 of them have been abducted for military service or work as sex slaves, McNamara said.

There are also up to 3 million internally displaced in Congo, and a further 2 million to 3 million in Colombia, he said.

I'm Doing All My Shopping On Amazon

This Christmas, I will not be ambushed by old hags with perfume bottles. I will not be stuck in the mall elevator with the gargantuan woman in short-shorts and a tubetop. No more screaming 5-year-olds, no hassles with sales clerks who have no idea how to sell anything or help anyone. No one will shout "wat up, dawg?!" at me, as though they knew me, or as though they will ever do anything with their life-other than get stoned.
I am shopping on Amazon.com. It's only me, the Amazon website, and my pop-up blocker to handle anything unexpected. This time, no one can swipe items from my shopping cart, or break anything after I pay for it but before they put the item into the bag (thus allowing them to blame me for no good reason). I will not have to avoid the football game in Best Buy's camera section, and not have to tell the store employees off for starting the game (this actually happened.. the employees blamed some innocent customers for everything they broke). And, yes; they were "going long".
Whatever I buy, it will be delivered within a few days. I will get the proper discounts without jumping through the hoops of whatever major company I'm shopping at. If I have a problem, Amazon's customer service will respond in a few days; while the people at Best Buy never understand anything I say to their face.


So, what's your opinion? What are your worst store experiences, and do you plan to shop online, or at least avoid certain stores based entirely on how they treated you last time?

Compilation Of Ukraine's Voter Fraud

Revealed: the full story of the Ukrainian election fraud
Be suspicious of this article; accurate information on voter fraud is hard to come by (especially when not from an original source).

The catalogue of abuses in the contest between Mr Yanukovich, the prime minister, and his opponent, the pro-Western Viktor Yushchenko, is growing longer by the day.
Ukraine is split, with the western, Europe-leaning regions voting overwhelmingly for Mr Yushchenko while the eastern part of the country - where many speak Russian - backing Mr Yanukovich.
Maya Syta, a journalist working at polling station 73 in a Kiev suburb, witnessed ballot papers destroyed with acid poured into a ballot box. "The officials were taking them out of the box and they couldn't understand why they were wet," she said.
"Then I saw they started to blacken and disintegrate as if they were burning. Two ballots were wrapped up into a tube with a yellow liquid inside. After a few moments they were completely eaten up."
In her polling station, 26 ballots were destroyed and had to be invalidated. Six other cases were recorded of ballots destroyed by acid.
The most common trick was "carousel" voting, in which busloads of Yanukovich supporters simply drove from one polling station to another casting multiple false absentee ballots.
In another brazen fraud recorded by observers from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, voters were given pens filled with ink that disappeared, leaving ballots unmarked and invalid.

Disappearing ink… that's a good one. I hadn't thought of something like that. Now, if only the US could solve the problem of "reappearing chads"

UKRAINE MEDIA IN REVOLT!

I believe that I can now call the presidency for Yushchenko. If you don't understand that sentence, and were not shocked by the article title, you do not know the power of the media.

A dictator has three priorities:
1: control the military and/or secret police and/or police.
2: control the media.
3: control the food supply.

With the military, an individual can overthrow the previous government, and prevent rebellions against the new dictator (to a good, but limited, extent).
The media will give a dictator popularity, which affects far more people than the military. A military can only guard one city: the capital of the nation (where the dictator is). A nation with a dictatorship almost always has one giant city (capital), a bunch of smaller cities, and tons of villages/tribes/whatever. There is no single city on par with the capital. If the military must guard more than the capital, then it will guard many cities, and will be stretched too thin (dictatorships don't actually get much money, so they can't get great militaries). The dictator usually gets his money from the capital city, or by controlling all commerce in his nation (so businesses are located in the capital). Saddam Hussein, for example, didn't really collect taxes; he pillaged banks and controlled Iraq's commerce (allowing some money to slip into his pocket. Actually, a lot of money). In order for a dictator to maintain power outside his capital, he needs at least one of two things, and often both: the media and secret police. The media can make the population love the dictator; the secret police will make the population fear him. Combined, the two make a very powerful combination. Additionally, if the dictator wants to exercise complete control over more than the capital, he must develop the infrastructure and communication system of the entire nation; but those things help civilians unite against the dictator. Secret police are never reliable, and they can only arrest someone after he opposes the dictator; but the media is cheap, based in the capital, and can prevent opposition altogether. Thus, it is easier, cheaper, and more effective for a dictator to control the media, if he must choose between the media and secret police (similar goes for if there are no secret police).
Now, for food. If a population is in rebellion, the dictator wants to cut off the food supply to the population, so he can either starve them into submission or starve them to death. Because of this, food is a very powerful tool for a dictator. Water may be used in similar ways, but it is harder to control, because water can only be cut off in large cities; villages would probably have their own water supply.

Ukraine probably can't get away with using secret police, the government cannot use the military against the people, and the government can not starve the population. So, the media is the only tool that the government has to control the population.
Now you know the power of the media. Or, at least I hope you do, because I've written up the best explanation of methods of manipulation that will fit into one page and take less than a few hours.


The Ukrainian media has stopped supporting Yanukovych. Before, they didn't even announce that there were protests in the capital, because government censors cut every mention of people who didn't like Yanukovych

Journalists on Ukraine's state-owned channel - which had previously given unswerving support to Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych - have joined the opposition, saying they have had enough of "telling the government's lies".
Journalists on another strongly pro-government TV station have also promised an end to the bias in their reporting. The turnaround in news coverage, after years of toeing the government line, is a big setback for Mr Yanukovych.
Journalists in Ukraine seem to have responded to the call by opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko for them to reject government censorship.
A correspondent on the state channel, UT1, announced live on the evening bulletin that the entire news team was going to join the protests in Independence Square. She said their message to the protesters was: "We are not lying anymore".
[…]
In the reinstated evening bulletin that replaced the election special, the channel's director Oleksander Rodnyansky stood in front of a solemn group of his colleagues to deliver a brief statement.
He began by saying: "The One Plus One TV channel fully resumes its news and political and social broadcasting.
"We understand our responsibility for the biased news that the channel has so far been broadcasting under pressure and on orders from various political forces."
Mr Rodnyansky went on to say that the station would now guarantee "full and impartial" news coverage, allowing all viewpoints to be expressed. The subsequent bulletin lived up to this promise.

Also, I have to give credit to the BBC journalist, Sebastian Usher, for understanding politics and his own power as a journalist:

Now that Ukrainian journalists have openly rebelled against such tight government control, Mr Yanukovych appears to have lost one of the key pillars of his support. It is another clear sign that the momentum behind the opposition is growing ever stronger.

For the first time, news of the protests will be broadcast in Ukraine's pro-Yanukovych east, where the nations only pro-Yushchenko channel was blocked.

Will The Buck Stop Here?

Dollar decline gathers pace, shaking global markets

The dollar accelerated its downward spiral, hitting record lows against the euro and multi-year troughs against other currencies, sending gold racing to fresh 16-year summits and weighing on Asian and European stock markets.

The euro shot to a new all-time peak of 1.3329 dollars in early European trading Friday, hurdling the 1.33 threshold for the first time since its launch in January 1999.

Morgan Stanley goes into some detail on the dollar's fall.

Now, to summarize the US economic situation (I'm no economist, mind you, so this is more guess than conclusion from research), the US dollar is falling for one reason-which encompasses many details: deficits. The federal deficit, which has some hope of shrinking in the next 5 years, is one large aspect. However, the US trade deficit is just as important, if not more so. Finally, the US is saving very little.
The government deficit is well known, so I'll jump to trade. America imports more than it exports, by far. American trade with China, for example, is quite imbalanced; the US imports about 150 billion more than it exports per year from China alone. Our trade with Japan is similar, but the trade difference is only around 75 billion. This means that America is losing money, and a lot of it. However, Chinese and Japanese exports are helped by the undervalued currencies of the respective countries (China's currency is undervalued to an extreme). Because the dollar is dropping, US exports will rise, as American products are becoming cheaper.
Personal savings has been low for at least a year (probably a few years), and tends to go down whenever interest rates drop. This is a natural relationship, as people are less inclined to save money when it will accumulate almost no interest. Much of the money that would otherwise be saved is spent on new houses. This is why home ownership has gone up so much. Houses are often seen as an investment, so many people are willing to exchange a savings account with a solid asset (a house).

So, the US is not saving money in three ways; federal deficit, trade deficit, and lack of personal savings. As a result, the dollar is not believed to have the strength that it used to have, though it is still quite strong. Honestly, I don't know the exact reasons that the dollar is falling, but I'd guess that some investors fear that the US may start to print a lot more money-causing some inflation-to cover these deficits. There are also many other factors, but I have no idea what those might be.

The quickest way to slow the dollar's fall is for China to allow its currency to be controlled by the market. Right now, the Chinese government controls the currency very strictly. If China's exports are no longer undervalued, then the US trade deficit with China will drop, because Americans will buy fewer Chinese products and more American products (along with more from other major sources of US imports).


However, the dollar's fall is largely expected to be good for the US, as long as that fall is controlled. A crash, of course, is never good. Europe's fragile recovery, which may have ended already, will be slowed by the appreciating Euro. There is already evidence that the European recovery ended practically before it started, in which case the expanded European Union is off to a very bumpy start.

Declaration of Independence Banned at California School

Article

A California teacher has been barred by his school from giving students documents from American history that refer to God -- including the Declaration of Independence.

Steven Williams, a fifth-grade teacher at Stevens Creek School in the San Francisco Bay area suburb of Cupertino, sued for discrimination on Monday, claiming he had been singled out for censorship by principal Patricia Vidmar because he is a Christian.
[…]
Williams asserts in the lawsuit that since May he has been required to submit all of his lesson plans and supplemental handouts to Vidmar for approval, and that the principal will not permit him to use any that contain references to God or Christianity.

Among the materials she has rejected, according to Williams, are excerpts from the Declaration of Independence, George Washington's journal, John Adams' diary, Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the Colonists" and William Penn's "The Frame of Government of Pennsylvania."

"He hands out a lot of material and perhaps 5 to 10 percent refers to God and Christianity because that's what the founders wrote," said Thompson, a lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund, which advocates for religious freedom. "The principal seems to be systematically censoring material that refers to Christianity and it is pure discrimination."

This may not be a case of discrimination, but rather of abusive micromanagement. Obviously, it's a bit insane that a teacher has to submit every lesson plan for approval. If this is true, the principal should be fired, as they are (1) abusing their power, (2) harassing an employee with that power, (3) micromanaging enough to significantly reduce efficiency and waste time, and (4) just being an ass. Those four problems are all certain, and there are probably many more useless errors.

If either case turns out to be true, which is easy to determine, the principal should be fired instantly. No pension, 3-week-notice, or 'paid suspension'. California has enough problems, and doesn't need this asshole to add to it.

And, give the teacher a bonus. No teacher should be subject to the stupid micromanagement that Williams faced.

Mind you, the school itself is not that great. According to this apparently credible website, it ranked 11th out of 15th, when compared to nearby schools (from the 'compare to nearby schools' link).

Hat tip to Drudge and this article, of The Desert Tusk, who got the story before me.
Also, you can check some of the original documentation at The Smoking Gun (those guys do an incredible job).

Powell Says U.S. Will Not Accept Final Tally in Ukraine

NYT article

With international pressure mounting on Ukraine, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said today that the United States could not accept its recent election results. He urged President Leonid Kuchma not to use force against the sprawling crowds in Kiev streets protesting the official outcome.

Defying American and European calls not to certify the election, Ukraine declared today that Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich was the winner of elections that several foreign monitoring groups and a White House special envoy have called seriously flawed.

"We cannot accept this result as legitimate because it does not meet international standards," Mr. Powell said, "and because there has not been an investigation of the numerous and credible reports of fraud and abuse."

The United States, he added, was "deeply disturbed" by these reports.

The secretary of state, in a forceful statement backed by similar declarations from European and Canadian officials, urged a full review of the election, which several international monitoring groups and a White House special envoy have declared seriously flawed.

The US has whined to the Russian ambassador in the US, but probably for useless reasons; the ambassador likely gets enough hell already, and it's not like he doesn't know the American sentiment.
And, the US wants to work with Russia to resolve the issue, but the solution must be according to America's demands, not Russia's, at least according to the US. Russia, naturally, wants the solution to follow Russia's demands.
This "let's make a deal, though we disagree on the basics of that deal" is quite common in diplomacy. The solution to this problem is found in an excellent quote by McCall Spirit, who said "diplomacy is the art of letting someone else have your way". In other words, the US has to make a Yushchenko victory attractive to Russia.

To do this, the US can either bribe/appease Russia, threaten Russia, or work out a clever situation in which case a Yanukovich victory would harm Russia (or a Yushchenko victory would help Russia). The last option is the best overall (as it costs the US nothing and doesn't hurt international relations), but it is also the most difficult, by far. I expect some combination of the first two options, though both the carrot and stick may be hidden under the table (to US citizens. They would be obvious to Russian diplomats and policy-makers, of course).

AOL-TimeWarner Fined 750 Million

article

The Securities and Exchange Commission and Time Warner Inc. are nearing agreement on a deal in which the media giant would pay about $750 million to settle wide-ranging allegations of accounting irregularities at Dulles-based America Online Inc.

AOL/Timewarner owns about half of the media, so few sources will actually tell you what "accounting irregularities" means. It means theft and fraud on a massive scale.
Let me give you an example: about two years ago, I used one of those 30-day free trials that AOL gives out. Around the 25th day, I told the company to cancel, in which case I wouldn't be charged anything and I'd go back to my current ISP (Earthlink, which has treated me quite well, and I am willing to recommend based on my own extensive experience). So, AOL cancelled my service, and I tried to go back to Earthlink. AOL, however, would not get out of the way, and I spent considerable effort to get my computer back from AOL. It turned out, however, that AOL/Timewarner cancelled my internet access, but didn't stop charging me for internet access. They charged me, quite illegally, for three more months after I cancelled on them. When I told them off for charging me well past their legal limits, they got aggressive with the credit card company and forced the bill to be paid (I believe there is some type of law a company can use to enforce charges when necessary. AOL decided to illegally abuse this law).
This event wasn't just limited to me. Some bankers have near-horror stories of trying to deal with AOL/Timewarner.

Some similar complaints are here, here (long list), and here.
Let me quote the last one:

AOL is billing me 28.90 per month for nothing. This should not be legal for them to do this to people. I don't know what else to do and I don't know how to keep it from happening. Do we not have any rights anymore that companies can bill you and then make you the bad guy for want[ing] them to take it off?

There's also some stuff on the near-impossibility of canceling AOL here, and a double-billing scheme here.

So, I am overjoyed that AOL is getting a huge fee. They deserve it. The executives who designed and authorized these schemes out to have their mansions torched, as well. Their yachts should be given to good consumer advocates like Ralph Nader, too (I wouldn't mind one, though). Hell, just imprison the executives like the criminals they are--maybe not the new one(s), as I don't know how good or bad they might be—but the old ones are not worth anything. No one would miss them. If the executives purposefully make their service nearly impossible to use and illegally bill customers, in some stupid scheme to make more money, then those executives deserve to lose everything.

Not only are AOL's actions irresponsible, but also they are a huge drain on the economy. Thousands (probably tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands) of people spent several hours trying to cancel AOL, resulting in a loss of tons of work-hours. That lowers overall US productivity. I admit that AOL caused very small changes in productivity, but they knowingly lowered it to illegally make an extra buck.

I am overjoyed with this fine. It is probably larger than the amount AOL stole from its customers, but it's impossible to get data for that. I would be happier if the money came directly from the executives, rather than the company as a whole--which will fire tons of people, many of them from the already-sucky customer service department, to recover the money. I'd also love to see some executives in prison, but that's probably wishful thinking.

Review Of Covert Operations, May Be Moved From CIA To Department Of Defense

article

President Bush has ordered an internal review into whether the Defense Department should run covert paramilitary operations traditionally mounted by the CIA, administration officials said on Tuesday.

The presidential directive, signed by Bush last week, asks the CIA and the Departments of State, Defense and Justice to report back to him in 90 days on "whether or not the paramilitary operations, currently under the control of the CIA, should be transferred to the Department of Defense," a senior administration official said.
[...]
Personnel in U.S. military Special Operations forces, such as Delta Force and Navy SEALs, are elite and highly trained troops who perform special missions, in many cases covert and behind enemy lines.

"Since this is a complex issue, we want to study it closely with the intelligence community to better understand it," said a Pentagon spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity. "We don't have any preordained or preferred solutions in mind. We are undertaking the study with open minds.

"We have been working formally and informally with the CIA already on this issue. We have a great deal of common ground and agreement with them," the spokesman added.

Officials said the interagency review, first reported by The New York Times, would look at whether paramilitary authorities should be transferred in their entirety to the Defense Department.

It could also advocate a more collaborative role between Special Operations forces and the paramilitary units of the intelligence agency. They already work together in the hunt for Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders.

I'll have to do some research on this, because it looks like an underdeveloped or premature story. However, it is quite important, and I hope the media at least mentions it. The Events in Ukraine, on the other hand, have been ignored by the US media (which I consider to be a huge error. The protests can be manipulated into a revolution if the media wants to get the highest possible ratings).

Ukraine Has Fradulent Elections, 'Losers' Protest In Mass

Wikipedia article
New York Times
Blogs: Europhobia, Vkhokhl, Connard (this guy was at the protests in Kiev, the capital of Ukraine), Fist Full Of Euros
Newspaper stories:Challenger (lost rigged election) reads oath of office, acts like the victor; The Western world declares that Ukraine's election was rigged.

This was the second vote for presidency. The first was a primary, in which Yushchenko was selected to be the challenger to Yanukovych (the closest thing to the incumbent), and Yushchenko lead slightly in the polls (each with nearly 40%. The rest of the votes went to 24 other potential challengers).

From Wikipedia:

In the November 21 runoff, Ukraine's electoral commission declared Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych the winner. According to electoral commission data, Yanukovich had 49.42 percent of the votes cast and Yushchenko had 46.69 percent of the votes cast. Viktor Yushchenko is calling for supporters to protest "the total falsification of the vote." City councils of four major cities in Western Ukraine, including Lviv and Ivano-Frankivs'k, have refused to recognize the official results and have declared that Yushchenko has won the election.
The election was held in a highly-charged atmosphere, with allegations of media bias, intimidation and even an alleged poisoning of Yushchenko. Many commentators saw the elections as being influenced by outside powers, notably the United States, the European Union and Russia, with the U.S. and EU backing Yushchenko (sending former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski and Senator John McCain to visit with Yushchenko), and Russian president Vladimir Putin publicly backing Yanukovich. In the media the two candidates are contrasted, with Yushchenko representing both the pro-Western Kiev residents as well as the rural Ukrainians, whereas Yanukovich represents the Eastern, pro-Russian industrial laborers. The United States and Europe fear that a Yanukovich win will halt the Ukraine's move toward integration with Europe (especially as regards any future accession to NATO or the EU). Russia fears that without a close relationship with Ukraine its ability to develop and prosper will be severely limited, and that the Ukraine could develop into a mildly hostile neighbor, much like the Baltic states have become since their integration into NATO and the EU. Putin has offered Ukraine an economic union and signed legislation permitting visa-less travel between the two countries in an attempt to underscore the potential relationship that would be available. Prominently anti-Soviet statesman Zbigniew Brzezinski casts the election as an opposition to renewed Russian imperialism:

"Russia is more likely to make a break with its imperial past if the newly independent post-Soviet states are vital and stable. Their vitality will temper any residual Russian imperial temptations. Political and economic support for the new states must be an integral part of a broader strategy for integrating Russia into a cooperative transcontinental system. A sovereign Ukraine is a critically important component of such a policy, as is support for such strategically pivotal states as Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan."

The temperature in Kiev is at or below freezing, and many protestors have set up tents.

Connard got that photo, and I hope he doesn't mind me using it.

The US media that has reported this (and I am guilty of this also) have known of the story but neglected to report it, and are probably making the protests sound more dangerous than they really are (they have been quite peaceful, though tense and stressful).

The Ukraine parliament is in a meeting at the moment, and it appears that most or all Yanukovych supporters have left it.


No matter what, this does not look good. This will leave deep scars in Ukraine for decades. If Yanukovych wins, about half or more of the country will not view him as the rightful president. If Yanukovych is not considered the rightful president, then the office of president will be given little power, and the nation will have a weaken and less-centralized power structure (bad, makes Ukraine more susceptible to revolutions and revolt). If Yushchenko wins, Ukraine may be better off due both to his support and his intention to join the rest of the western world. However, there would be a precedent for protestors overturning the decision of the government, and Yushchenko would be very dependant on popular opinion. If masses of protestors put Yushchenko into power, they can take him out of power just as easily. Plus, there would be considerable distrust of the government and election system, which also makes Ukraine more prone to revolution.

If a nation is more susceptible to revolution, the actions of its government change considerably, because the government wants to prevent revolution. Often, propaganda is critical in maintaining stability, and democracy is undermined—because voters with less power can do less to harm the government.

I hope this s resolved peacefully and quickly, and that the fraudulent (or, possibly, not fraudulent) elections are blamed on a loser, rather than on the entire government. Blaming the loser will undermine future challengers, but it will help to uphold the stability of the government.

Little Green Footballs Reports: Britain Foiled 9/11-Style Attack

Britain Foiled 9/11-Style Attack

British security services have foiled an Al-Qaeda plot to fly planes into targets in London in a September 11-style attack, Britain’s independent ITV News network reported.

“This is the story of what could have been a nightmare averted,” said ITV’s political editor Nick Robinson. “A story not of failure, but of success.”

“That, at least, is what I am told by a senior authoritative source who says that the security services managed to avert a plot to fly planes into Canary Wharf here, and also into Heathrow Airport,” he said.

awaiting further confirmation, and expecting the media to gloss over this story. It is already believed that Britain prevented several other attacks, though those were mostly bombings or uses of toxic gasses.
origional article

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, if at all. A popularization of this story, mixed with the clashes in the Netherlands, could spread anti-Muslim sentiment farther through Europe, and may spread Dutch-like reactions.

Iran Will Keep Making Nukes, No Matter What It Agrees To, And Europe Doesn't Care

from Cox & Forkum Editorial Cartoons:

The agreement that France, Germany and Britain reached with Iran this week signals that the diplomatic option of dealing with Iran's nuclear weapons program no longer exists. To understand why this is the case, we must look into the agreement and understand what is motivating the various parties to accede to its conditions.
The agreement stipulates that the European-3 will provide Iran with light water reactor fuel, enhanced trade relations and more nuclear reactors. In exchange, the Iranians agree that for the duration of the negotiations toward implementing the agreement -- including a European push for Iranian ascension to the World Trade Organization -- it will not develop centrifuges and will not enrich uranium. At the same time, the Europeans accepted Iran's claim that it has the legal right to complete the entire nuclear fuel cycle -- meaning, it has the legal right to enrich uranium. ...

Iran's interest in making the deal is clear. The IAEA governing board is set to meet next week to discuss Iran's nuclear program. By agreeing to the deal with the Europeans, Iran has effectively foreclosed the option, favored by the US, of transferring Iran's nuclear program to the UN Security Council for discussions that could lead to sanctions on Iran.

Aside from that, all along, Iran has been gaming the system. It has pushed to the limits all feasible interpretation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, of which it is a signatory, to enable it to reach the cusp of nuclear weapons development without breaking its ties or diminishing its leverage over the Europeans as well as the Russians and Chinese. In so doing, it has isolated the US and Israel -- which have both gone on record that Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons -- from the rest of the international community, which is ready to enable Iran to achieve nuclear weapons capabilities.

The article tells the story quite well.

US Will Give More Money To NASA, Finally

From page 2 of the article linked to in the earlier post:

The NASA space agency, a priority of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, found a last minute boost to $16.2 billion, an increase of $822 million over last year's levels.

This is great! NASA's programs actually put out ten times as much money as they take in. In other words; give NASA one dollar, you get ten dollars back (over some time. This compensates for inflation, also). This is due to the incredibly technological inventiveness of NASA. Not only did NASA invent space pens (they can write upside-down. We decided to outdo the Russian space agency, which used pencils), Velcro, and Tang; they also made tons of computer developments and revolutionized communication. Without NASA, there would be no cell phones or satellite TV, and cable TV would be far more expensive, because cable TV is only distributed locally by cable – it is broadcast to distributors by satellite.
This money will help Bush's 'send men to Mars' project, and all of science in the process. When science is helped, American industries have many new products to make, and the world has a lot of American stuff to buy.

They're Bringing Back The Presidential Yacht!

Eschaton just reported this:

The Senate voted 65-30 for the legislation late on Saturday that sets aside funds for a range of priorities including a presidential yacht, foreign aid and energy. It is one of the final pieces of work for the 108th Congress and they may return to finish a spy agency overhaul before the end of the year.

article
I am overjoyed, honestly. I know that my three return readers (is it really that many? I'm moving up the blogosphere…) are somewhat used to my sarcasm, but I am not being sarcastic. The Presidential Yacht is probably going to be the second most amazing vehicle in the world, right behind Air Force One (Presidential Jet), but that's only because Air Force One is a jet. Technically, the yacht may be third, as there are two Air Force One's, and they are exactly identical. Clinton may have carved his initials into the bathroom of one, but that would be the only difference (plus, there's no evidence of Clinton doing this).
The Yacht was abandoned several administrations ago, probably after or during the Kennedy era. In fact, Kennedy's yacht may not have been the official Presidential Yacht; I believe it was actually Kennedy's boat from before he entered the White House.

Now, each Air Force one costs like 200 million dollars to operate per year (that's the low estimate. One Clinton trip to Asia in 200 cost 63 million). And, it's not just the one jet that the president takes when he travels; there are at least two giant cargo jets that carry the Presidential limo and whatnot. The Air Force One's are the most advanced 747's known to man, and they are constantly upgraded so they stay the most advanced. They only thing that might be more advanced is the space shuttle (I don't think the International Space Station counts as a vehicle).
Air Force One has only two uses: to transport the president, and to impress foreign dignitaries. It is far easier to make deals with foreign leaders if you can impress them with incredible luxury, so the jets do return some money to the American taxpayer.

In my opinion, Bush needs to get rid of one Air Force One. He can keep one, but he doesn't need both. (but what should Bush do if he can't ride his only 747 if it has problems?-ed) The president should have another jet, maybe a Gulfstream V (around 35 million is a basic cost for the plane, I believe), which is sportier and cheaper. A Gulfstream V might even be faster, and it could be modified to refuel in the air, and heavily upgraded like all presidential vehicles.

Anyway, replacing one 747 with a Gulfstream V would leave a lot of money for the presidential yacht. Yachts are the ultimate in luxury travel. Not even a 747 can compare, because jets are loud, confined, and quite limited in how much stuff you can put on. Boats don't have the requirement of flying, thus allowing them to hold far more, and they are quiet, and they can be quite open. If you want to impress a foreign diplomat, yachts are the best vehicles to use, by far. Don't believe me? Check out this beauty:


By the way, that's the Annaliesse from here. The camera image brings up a pop-up with specifications and more images, including some interior ones. And yep, that's a helipad on the boat. Very expensive, might I add. About $850,000 per week. I am drooling, by the way.
A president-worthy luxury superyacht probably costs half as much as an Air Force One. The Saudi Royal Family has some of the greatest yacht on earth, and I think it's about time Bush shows off; can't let the oil barons dominate the 480-foot-yacht club (there's only one member, Abdul Aziz). Actually, that yacht cost only 100 million, but isn't a great looker from the outside. It ought to be a crime to spend 100 million on a yacht and not make it beautiful. I wonder if Bush can simply declare war on Saudi Arabia and take all their yachts away; that would pay for the new war and Iraq. And, let's not forget about the Saudi Royal family's jets, or all that artwork.

Bush Rescues Secret Service From Chilean Police

Just so you know, this is a fictional story built around real pictures and a real event. real article, another good article. Photos are from here.


As Bush walks through the nation of Chile...


Chilean guy: hey budy, you got some spare change?

alright, give me the wallet!

Then the Secret Service agent, Nick Trotta, applies the Vulcan Death Grip

two more Chileans jump in, and try to prevent the agent from using the Death Grip again. Meanwhile, the Big Mob Boss (front, slightly blurry) says "you don't want any of this, you got me?"

President Bush, the head honcho of his Secret Service detail, notices the fight between his agents and the Chilean guards, who are also drug barons in their off-time.

Bush starts swaggering over to his endangered bodyguard.

"Hey, stop prancing around like New Jersey governor McGreevy. Get over here, pronto!"

Bush applies the Vulcan Death Grid to the first drug baron.

then does the same to the second, who couldn't escape the Texan's hand, even though that hand was coated with oil.

After freeing his guard, Bush states "c'mon, you pansy, I have work to do."

Once safely behind Bush, who upheld his title as Defender Of The Free World, agent Nick Trotta shouts "my president can beat up your president, wussies!"

Tolerant Dutch Society Starting To Crack Down On Intolerant Immigrants

AP Interview: Popular Dutch lawmaker urges halt to non-Western immigrants, shutting down radical mosques

One of the most popular politicians in the Netherlands said Friday the country's democracy is under threat and called for a five-year halt to non-Western immigration in the wake of the killing of a Dutch filmmaker by a suspected Muslim radical.

"We are a Dutch democratic society. We have our own norms and values," right-wing lawmaker Geert Wilders told The Associated Press in an interview. "If you chose radical Islam you can leave, and if you don't leave voluntarily then we will send you away. This is the only message possible."
[...]
Wilders said that without swift, bold action, Islamic fundamentalism will topple the country's democratic system.

"The Netherlands has been too tolerant to intolerant people for too long," he said. "We should not import a retarded political Islamic society to our country. There is nothing to be ashamed of to say this. It's not Islam. I speak out against the facts."

In Brussels, Belgium, European Union leaders met Friday to discuss immigration, one of Europe's most pressing and sensitive issues. EU justice and interior ministers agreed to demand that new immigrants learn the language of their adopted countries and adhere to "European values" to guide them toward better integration.

Even as the number of immigrants arriving in Europe falls due to tougher policies, led by a sharp drop in the Netherlands, Wilders said closing the borders isn't enough. Newcomers should be forced to integrate.

"If in a mosque there is recruitment for jihad, it's not a house of prayer, it's a house of war. If it's not a house of prayer, it should be closed down," he said.

Wilders, known for his radical positions and peroxide-blond hair, has been a member of parliament since 1998. He was born and educated in the southern city Venlo, near the German border.

"I'm very tough on radical Islam. I have the toughest ideas on beating this problem and I'm proud of it. I say nothing wrong. I'm no racist, no anti-Islamist," he said.

The problem with societies that claim to be tolerant is that, often, they are not. I've written a bit about Norway on the subject. The Netherlands, previously, had a "don't interfere with what anyone wants to do"-ish policy with immigrants, and allowed Muslim extremist societies to form.
The US, in my opinion, also needs to take a completely different stance on immigration. First off, we need to drop all limits on the number of immigrants the nation will accept. The limits are not only harmful to those who want to immigrate legally, but they are ignored more often than they are followed, resulting in many illegal immigrants who are not welcome in the country. There are many who don't want strict measures against illegal immigrants, because they would harm good people as well as the bad, so I think we need to separate the good people from the bad by allowing unlimited immigration of those who qualify.
Now, the requirements for people to qualify:
1: 8th grade education or higher, or equivalent thereof. The immigrants must be able to read (most illegal immigrants from Mexico can't read anything, much less english). I won't require highschool because I doubt there are many people who went to jr. highschool but not the rest of highschool. Besides, an 8th-grade limit would prevent many people from immigrating.
2: ability to speak some english. Maybe proper use of 2500 words would be fine, but I am guessing at that number. I don't want people to immigrate if they have no idea what any American is saying, but I don't want to require fluent english for all immigrants.
3: fairly good background and crime record. Maybe a few small crimes (theft of a can of coke, for example) can be allowed, but no felonies or violent crimes.
4: drug and medical test. If the person is riddled with disease, they don't get in unless they have a very good reason. If they are packed with illegal drugs (which we can test for a fairly long period of time based on hair samples, I believe), they stay out.
We also need to fix the immigration and border patrol services. Border patrol is too often completely useless because they chase occasional immigrants, rather than prevent most of them from crossing, are too tied by frivolous regulations. From what I hear, the people at immigration services are quite incompetent and give a horrible first impression of the US. If what I hear is true, those programs need major overhauls. Border patrol can get major help with a fence to prevent most from crossing, so that the agents have fewer people to catch and, therefore, fewer people sneak in when the agents catch as many people as they did before. Immigration services are a completely different story, and institutional incompetence has to be fixed from the top down. Time for some purging, maybe?

Those are, I think, some fairly simple and good limitations for whom to let in, or to keep out. The simple truth is that America needs a huge influx of immigrants who can adapt to American culture and participate in the workforce. One of the easiest ways to limit the crippling costs of the retirement of the baby-boomer generation is to get millions of immigrants, age about 25 to 40, who can help fund social security and healthcare. If the US can get 10 million working-age and educated immigrants over the next 4 or 5 years, I'll be overjoyed. Sure, there will be a bit more competition for jobs, but I will have a far smaller burden in paying for the baby-boomers. It's probably an economist's dream to have a large influx of good, educated, working-age immigrants, anyway. Having educated immigrants means that the US gets good labor, without having to pay for the immigrant's school, which is usually quite expensive.

Now, the US will have to start guarding the US-Mexican border. Mexico won't guard it, Mexico's second largest source of income is the money that immigrants to the US send back to their families. If Mexico would stop being incredibly corrupt, it would probably be possible to make a good deal with our neighbor on immigration, tourism, and trade policies; but it's not like such will happen without Mexican reform or the US giving more concessions than it's worth.

Either we need to build a very big wall, and actually guard that wall, or we need to dig a very deep ditch, and make sure no one makes an unwelcome bridge across that ditch. Currently, the only barrier is a large desert. Such deserts would usually be perfect to divide the US and Mexico, but the incredible poverty of Mexico compared the the wealth of the US convinces hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of people to try to cross the desert each year; many get over the border, and many die in the effort. The US doesn't really want either to happen. The easiest solution is to have very open immigration policies, and to have strict border guards to ensure that people can't get in without us knowing.

Maybe he should try Gmail...

Bill Gates world's most spammed person

yeah, hotmail gets tons of spam. Lots of it is actually from the people of hotmail, though. Someone should send him a gmail invite...

Sears and K-Mart Merge

article

Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Kmart Holding Corp. today announced a merger aimed at setting a new record in the arena of retail bankruptcy filings.

"Rather than just vanish from the American landscape, we want to be remembered by our shareholders for decades," said Kmart CEO Edward Lampert who will head the new Sears Holding Corp. "We're change agents, and this merger is bound to change college and retirement plans for thousands of our shareholders."

In related news, jailed Kmart partner Martha Stewart will release a new video demonstrating how to make wallpaper from Sears Holding Corp. stock certificates.

"The wallpaper is attractive and the best way to get value out of your stock," according to Ms. Stewart's cellmate, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Sears and Kmart executives remain free pending charges.

Additionally, Sears is formulating plans to have the spokeperson of their Craftman's tool line, Bob Vila, break Martha Stewart out of prison.

"Martha and I actually had a deal worked out for years" stated Bob Vila when walking through the ceiling fan section of his local hardware store "we agreed that, if I got into prison, Martha would bake a cake with a nail file in it. Then, I would shave my bunk bed into little pieces, and form them into a chainsaw so I could carve a hole in the prison wall. But, since Martha got arrested, I have to add an extra room to her cell. More specifically, I have to add an escape rout."

The famed construction worker looks forward to using his new CellBreaker 666, "if not for this tool, I don't think I could rescue Martha. It's not that only the CellBreaker 666 would work - I could use anything to raid the prison - but the CellBreaker is fast enough that I won't be killed by Martha's bitching about how the floor gets dirty."

Martha was too busy making tapestries out of her former cellmate's skin to be reached for comment.



Just in case you didn't realize, this is a joke. Martha killed her cellmate months ago, and turned the skin into a leather jacket, which she bartered for a needlepoint set.

UN Staff To Vote On No-Confidence Motion Against Koffi Annan

article

This is huge, and completely unexpected. After over $21 billion in swindled oil-for-food money, blockades to virtually every investigation of the UN, continued crimes against humanity in places like Sudan (mind you, Annan was in charge of the UN Peacekeepers during the Rwandan genocide, when many UN peacekeepers were in Rwanda but did nothing to stop the slaughter), nearly complete incompetance in the higher levels of the UN, and obvious corruption - to the extent that the US is removed from the UN Commission on Human Rights, while Libya was given the leadership of the Commission.

Annan should be thrown out of the UN (preferably out of a fairly high window of the building, many would argue. The technical term for this is “defenestration”, by the way. Here is a great alternative definition for defenistrate: "5; The act of completely removing Micro$oft Windows from a PC in favor of a better OS (typically Linux)." It's actually on the dictionary.com page as a definition, right after some other funny variations involving the 'windows' on computers). However, I never actually expected that there would be a vote against him, and I thought he would stay Secretary General until he either dies, is no longer able to move under his own power, or is checked into a lunatic asylum and never released from the straightjacket.

I wonder how the vote will turn out. Annan will probably stay, but that assumption is based only on the fact that the vote is completely unexpected.

The Most Important People Of 2004

My top-ten list of 2004 (subject to updates). This list is in no way a “best people of 2004”; it is a countdown of who has defined this year, as history will see it, and certainly contains quite a few horrendous people. The list includes some who are only small figures, and wouldn’t be included at all if not for the likelihood that they will, someday, be at the top of the list (such as Obama). It also includes some who have been selected to represent a much larger group (specifically, the Iraqi soccer team, which exemplified Iraq’s potential and ability to improve). Now, to the countdown:

10: Pervez Musharraf, president of Pakistan (has helped the US fight terrorism, is working to end conflicts with India, and may eventually help turn Pakistan into a more free nation)
9: Iraqi soccer team, which represents the recovery of all of Iraq
8: Omar hasan Ahmed al-Bashir, the president of Sudan (genocide)
7: Barack Obama
6: Mel Gibson
5: Roger Ailes, the President, CEO, and Chairman of FOX News
4: Hamid Karzai, the first and (so far) only failry elected president of Afghanistan
3: Burt Rutan, the man who designed SpaceShipOne and put the first commercial astronaut into space
2: Larry Page and Sergey Brin, the two founders of Google. Some day, these two, or their followers, will top this list.
1: Michael Moore, whose irrelevance is the harbinger of a changing United States. History is unlikely to pick him as the most important figure of the year, if it even remembers him at all; but, at this time, the inability of Michael Moore to get Bush out of the White House signals a decline of the importance of celebrities and the media.

Runners-up and honorable mentions: Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Teresa Heinz Kerry (she’s more memorable than John Kerry), John Stewart (yeah, the comedian on The Daily Show With John Stewart. He’s one of few liberals that tries to be fair, will admit his bias, and does an incredibly good job), Tony Blair, the people of Pixar (the animation company that has pretty much replaced Disney. Perhaps these guys should have had an earlier year, but they deserve mention for The Incredibles this year) and probably many others who are of great importance but didn’t stand out in this year alone.

Oil-for-Food Money Went to Palestinian Bombers' Families

article

It's well known that Saddam cheated the oil-for-food program, and that almost every nation involved in oil-for-food knew about it. However, the world was getting oil out of Iraq, and oil was all that the world really cared about at the time. It is now believed that Saddam took $21 billion out of the oil-for-food program to illegally line his own pockets, and that is a huge chunk of the program's assets. It's also well known that Saddam sent money to the families of suicide bombers.
This report, however, shows that some of the money stolen from oil-for-food went directly to the families of suicide bombers. Such a direct connection was not previously known.

I might also note that the US is investigating a suspected terrorist, who may have funneled money from Saddam to Jacques Chirac. Several high-ranking French politicians have already been identified as illegally accepting quite a bit from Saddam, often in the form of oil vouchers (which could easily be exchanged for cash). Additionally, Kofi Annan's son (Kofi Annan is the head of the UN) was employed by a company believed to have illegally worked with Saddam, and made a hefty profit by doing so.

The UN continues to block investigations into the oil-for-food program.

NASA Scramjet Sets a New Air-Speed Record

Article

A NASA research jet sets a new air speed record for air-breathing engines by traveling nearly 7,000 mph, or 10 times the speed of sound. The space agency's X-43A "scramjet" flew over the Pacific Ocean at 110,000 feet after being taken aloft under the wing of a B-52B bomber.

After its release from beneath the larger craft's wing, a booster rocket ignited, sending the X-43A on its way.

Grats to Nasa, and my sympathies go to those who built the scramjet, because the jet crashed into the ocean after reaching its record-making speed, as it was designed to do (the aircraft had no human pilot).
A bit more from Nasa here

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

On an unrelated note, my apologies for not getting to the story in which an American soldier killed a wounded insurgent in Iraq.. I will mention, however, that insurgents had been setting traps with their bodies or with the bodies of their killed comrades. This was a tactic used by both the Japanese in WWII and the Koreans and Vietnamese in the Cold War, and resulted in the deaths of many US troops. In fact, if my information is right, an explosion is heard in the background not long before the insurgent is killed. That explosion was from a booby-trapped corpse; one marine was killed and five others were injured by the explosion. If the insurgent was in fact alive, there was a good chance that he was planning to act exactly like the Palestinian suicide bombers, and take out several Americans in the process. In this case, I don't think you can blame the troop for killing the insurgent; who was firing at us from inside a mosque, against international rules, mind you. Personally, I don't really care that we killed another insurgent, except for the slight possibility that we may have gotten information out of him. Now, I am quite willing to rip at the media for showing the marine kill the insurgent without mentioning the fact that the insurgent could be planning to detonate himself along with several of our troops. If the media mentioned that little bit (plus the interesting detail that the soldier who kiled the insurgent had been shot in the face the day before), then I would be fine with them reporting the story. But, without the extra information, that's intentional manipulation of the event - and one of the most immoral acts that the media could commit.

By the way, need I reference the earlier articles in which the media claimed that they didn't publish the election exit poll results because it was unethical/immoral/against journalistic standards to do so? Where are those ethics and standards now?

FBI Imformant Torches Himself Outside White House

Article

A man who set himself on fire outside the White House on Monday claimed to be an informant of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), The Washington Post reported Tuesday.
Mohamed Alanssi, 52, approached the northwest guardhouse on Pennsylvania Avenue about 2:05 pm local time and asked security officers to deliver a note to President George W. Bush.
When turned away by Secret Service officers, Alanssi ignited his jacket with a lighter; the report quoted the US Park Police as saying. The fire was extinguished [and the officers subdued Alanssi].
Alanssi was taken to Washington Hospital Center, where he was said [...] to be in critical condition with burns to about 30 percent of his body.

Thanks a lot, FBI, you incompetent morons. Let me give a bit more background. This guy was an informant to the FBI for several years. After his name was leaked to the media (great job, leaking the name of a good informant! What a way to keep our helpers happy! Please note sarcasm), he was interviewed several times about his life as an informant. That leak resulted of harassment of his family in Yemen (hint; get his family out of Yemen. Shouldn’t an intelligence service know to keep an informant’s family safe, especially after they leak his name?) His recent complaint was that the FBI would not let him visit some sick family members in Yemen because they need him to testify against Mohammed Al Moayad – in January. He says that he was paid about $100,000 for his information and services, which FBI sources described as “about right”. Alanssi claims that an FBI member promised he would be a millionaire for his information (no contract or anything, just a statement).
Obviously, Alanssi is unhappy that he is not a millionaire, that his family may be under some risk, that he can’t visit them, and that he generally wasn’t treated all that well. I can’t blame him for any of those counts – tell me that I’ll get a million dollars for something, and I’ll want a million dollars for it. This guy even put his life and his family at risk. I'd expect the FBI to treat an informant fairly well, especially before they testify against a major terror suspect.

Now, this good source torched himself right outside the White House, after threatening to do it! Great, we have our informants burning alive outside the White House (note the sarcasm), and the FBI was warned that it would happen! How many more informants do you think we will get? Probably, none, because no one wants the type of treatment this guy received.
It looks like the FBI knew this guy was very unhappy, and I can’t believe they didn’t do more for him.

First off, offer the guy a ride on the next military transport plane that goes near where his family is. C-130’s have some nice first-class seating; folded parachutes make surprisingly comfy seats. Airline meals and military meals are almost identical, too. Then, let him spend some time with his family, if he must spend time with them (if he needs a guard, then give him a guard). Or, better yet, offer to take his family to the US – plus free college scholarships for his kids (any current or future ones, not sure if he currently has kids). I think most people would accept that offer, and it would keep the informant quite happy. Then, give the informant half a million dollars if he really wants it. He lives in Washington DC, doesn’t he? I don’t think $100,000 can get a foreign guy, who kind of fears for his life, that far in DC. Maybe he could find a place to live in one of the ghetto-esque areas, which have some of the highest murder rates in the nation (in which case both terrorists and your neighbors are trying to kill you). If the man is still unhappy with half a million, give him another hundred thousand or two and tell him how to invest it. That should get him set up fairly well for life; he has enough money to live in a fairly decent neighborhood, his kids will get into college for free, he probably has enough money to get by while he helps his family settle into the US and everyone learns a bit of English (if they don’t know it already). And, if the guy currently speaks good English, or learns to speak good English, he can become one of the translators that the government desperately needs - and you already know the man is loyal. It's a win-win situation every step of the way, as long as the informant doesn't get killed.

Not that bad of a deal, in my opinion. Informant does well, keeps his family safe, and even gives them a great chance for a better life. Also, the FBI has a loyal informant, who may be willing to work as a translator in the future (and you know he’s reliable if he takes the job), and there is not a problem. However, the FBI couldn’t keep this guy happy, and he just did so much more harm to the US than he did good.

First off, our “witness” against the terror suspect just gave rather convincing evidence that he’s insane. Thus, he no longer is a reliable witness. Also, an informant burning outside the White House does not really encourage more people to become informants for the US. This was one of those problems that can be solved – quite easily – with money, and government should have plenty of experience with trying to solve things with money. $500,000 isn’t that much compared to the billion-dollar spy satellites that we use but don’t really need, or tomahawk missiles that cost several millions of dollars each. We often use several tomahawks to destroy the same target, to ensure that it is completely destroyed (we used over a dozen on the house we thought Saddam may be in just before we started the war in Iraq).


This event will harm America’s prestige so much for prospective informants. The affects of this will be similar to those of Abu Ghraib (without the media circus); this is something that America-haters couldn’t even pay for, and it will help them recruit and keep dozens, hundreds, or maybe even thousands of terrorists/insurgents. We will have incredible difficulty finding informants from now on.

Powell Out, Condi In

ABC News: Condoleezza Rice to Be Named Secretary of State

National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, one of President Bush's closest counselors, will be nominated to replace Colin Powell as secretary of state, ABC News has learned.
...
ABC News has also learned that Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley will likely replace Rice as national security adviser.

The announcement comes as a sort of birthday present for Rice, who turned 50 on Sunday.

Few people are better qualified for an office than Condi Rice. However, I see one problem with her: she is a Soviet expert. There are no more Soviets; her entire specialty has vanished. I, honestly, can't be sure whether she views the world as the way it is today, or the way it was when she first learned how to view the world, when the Soviets were a large threat.

Additionally, Bush's Education Secretary, Rod Paige, is resigning amid some controversies of his own (he called the nations largest teacher's union a "terrorist organization"). There are also some claims that he "stacked the deck", in a manner of speaking, in order to improve student test scores; but I have doubts. Plus, I have no evidence of this, other than word-of-mouth claims.

Bush's Energy Secretary and Commerce Secretary Don Evans are also expected to leave. Attorney General John Ashcroft will be replaced with Alberto Gonzalez, a very qualified conservative, if my memory is correct. I believe Bush wanted to appoint him to the Supreme Court, but he got philibustered, but my memory may be wrong.

Clash Of Cultures In Netherlands

Note: I have been attempting to make a new setup, where I simply list links to some of the major stories of the day, and have a few-paragraph summary included in an onmouseover event (it will appear in a frame when the mouse is held over the link). Unfortumately, it appears that blogger will not allow me to use the method that I origionally intended, so I will have to use frames the 'long way', once I find out how. I was hoping that this new method would conserve a lot of space, and that I may even be able to get other blogs to use the tool (linking to me in the process). I hope to work on this tool next weekend, after I re-learn some javascript.

Anyway, here is the link and summary, or one of them (with more to come):
article

The Netherlands claim to be one of the most tolerant nations in the world, with legalized prostitution, drugs, and near-limitless immigration. The majority of children younger than 14 in Netherlands four largest cities are Muslim, due to massive immigration of around one million Muslims into Europes most crowded small country. Most of these Muslims make little effort to integrate into Dutch culture. An anti-Muslim backlash has spread throughout Europe, and the Netherlands largest political party was forced to disband due to anti-immigration views. The divide between most Dutch and the Muslims in the Netherlands came into focus when Theo Van Gogh was assassinated, because he made a movie depicting the oppression that women often face in Islamic society. Twelve men have been arrested in connection with this crime, including two who threw a grenade at police during a 14-hour standoff. A series of tit-for-tat attacks on mosques, churches, and schools followed the murder and arrests; with one Christian being completely gutted, while a small bomb exploded in a Muslim school. Two years ago, Pim Fortuyn was also gunned down for opposing immigration with the claim that the Netherlands were full. Presence of 1,300 Dutch troops in Iraq have raised tensions, and one 18-year-old was arrested for plotting terrorist attacks months ago. Ismlamic extremism even penetrated the Dutch intelligence service, resulting in the arrest of one double agent and the drafting of a Patriot Act-like law (which I am not quite willing to support unless I can find a lot more information about it). For years, intelligence authorities have been warning about the tinderbox that many Muslim communities, and their potential fanaticism, have become.

MSNBC - Why We Watched

MSNBC - Why We Watched The Peterson Trial
My response: No, we didn't. Enough said. Peterson will get Ol' Sparky because everyone in America is willing to kill him to get the media to shut up. Peterson is not a news story. Go away, so-called "mainstream media". Get some real stories. Do actual investigation. Report something interesting. In the meantime, I'll be doing research for articles that are worth the time I spend writing them, and worth the time you spend reading them.

Radio Identification For Medicine Bottles

one source (scroll down a bit)
Drudge just started a story on radio antennas on medicine bottles, which seems a bit ridiculous at first. However, the radio transmitters would be RFID (Radio Frequency Identifier) chips, which would be used to prevent counterfeits. Similar chips are used in security systems to prevent theft, along with many other uses that I don't have the knowledge to list.
What Drudge hasn't mentioned is that this system is already in use, although only to a small extent.

In an effort to detect counterfeit drugs before they reach consumers’ medicine cabinets, big pharmaceutical companies are beginning to implement radio frequency identification, or RFID, technology, the Associated Press reports. By putting tags that transmit radio waves on medicine bottles sent to drug stores, company officials intend to find fake drugs that are not moving through usual supply chains.

According to the AP, a distribution center in Delran, N.J., owned by wholesaler McKesson Corp., is one of several centers nationwide involved in a pilot project shipping small quantities of RFID-labeled drug bottles from manufacturing plants to pharmacies. At the center a worker sets a box of tagged drug bottles on a table where a radio-wave scanner and computer run through a list of scenarios involving theft, recalled drugs, outdated drugs or other logistical errors. So far, the “track record has been pretty good with it,” officials at the distribution center report.

The RFID tags look like ordinary labels, but are actually computer chips with antennas wrapped around them. Sensors at distribution centers use radio waves to activate the tags, which are read electronically and stamped with a record of where they have been, the AP reports.

The $3 million project includes drug makers such as Johnson & Johnson, Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc., Merck & Co. and Wyeth. Distributors, such as Cardinal Health Inc. and McKesson Corp., and retailers, such as CVS Corp. and Rite Aid Corp., are also participating.

Overall, the plan isn't much of a "big brother" system. It is one of few possible methods to recall all drugs that need to be recalled. Usually, only a few percent of a recalled item are actually returned.

There are also some plans to use microchips to announce the information that is written on the pill bottle, in order to help patients with bad vision.

The Hunt For Arafat's Money

DRUDGE article
I'll quote the entire article before Drudge takes it down:

MAG: Arafat Skimmed $2 Million a Month From the Gas Trade
Sun Nov 14 2004 09:53:40 ET

New York -- Last year auditors discovered Arafat was guilty of skimming $2 million a month from the gasoline trade in the territories, TIME reports.

In August 2002 international donors forced Arafat to sign over his investments to the Palestine Investment Fund, which was audited by U.S. accountants and managed by Palestinian Finance Minister Salam Fayyad, a former International Monetary Fund official. After scouring corporations throughout the Arab world and bank accounts in the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg, the auditors identified $800 million, which has been made a part of the Palestinian Authority’s official budget. “It’s the most successful financial reform in the Arab world,” Jim Prince, president of the Los Angeles–based Democracy Council and head of the audit team, tells TIME.

People close to Fayyad’s investigation told TIME of Arafat’s skimming from the gas trade. Breaking the gasoline smuggling and corruption boosted the Palestinian Authority’s official treasury by $10 million a month and cut gas prices for ordinary Palestinians.

“Arafat’s death means his followers may never know just how much more they may be owed,” writes TIME’s Matt Rees in “Where’s Arafat’s Money?” In the mid-1990s, Arafat controlled a financial empire worth at least $3 billion. By the time of his death, he was down to his last $1 billion, according to Israeli-intelligence estimates.

Arafat wife Suha’s outburst that his successors were “trying to bury [him] alive” came after she learned that Arafat had signed over at least $800 million to the government of the Palestinian Authority two years ago, TIME reports. Top Palestinian officials say Suha wants the new chief of the P.L.O., Mahmoud Abbas, and Palestinian prime minister Ahmed Qurei to give her money out of the P.L.O.’s party coffers. But a senior P.L.O. official tells TIME, “they’ll pay her a pension, and that’s it.”

People familiar with Arafat’s finances say the Palestinian leader sent Suha $200,000 a month out of the Palestinian Authority’s budget for the Office of the President. French authorities are investigating transfers of $15 million from Swiss banks to Paris accounts in Suha’s name at the Arab Bank and at BNP Paribas Bank, a French bank, TIME reports.

Senior Palestinian security officials tell TIME that Arafat also shipped money to the gunmen of the Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.

Developing...

THANK YOU DRUDGE!

Arafat has been known as the world's richest terrorist for years. His personal savings - believed to be at or over a billion - however, remained quite mysterious throughout his life. Some (like me) believe that Arafat's money bankrolled terrorist groups such as Hamas and Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (recently renamed after Arafat).
I believe that the search for Arafat's money will be a major issue for Palestinian finance experts, as the sheer amount of money that could be returned to the Palestinian territory is huge, not to mention potential fees that accountants may charge for locating the funds. Because much of Arafat's money is in Swiss banks, which are subject to very little regulation, and may be able to hide and keep Arafat's money in less-than-legal but non-punishable methods.
The International Monetary Fund believes that there is a nealry 900 million dollar hole in the Palestinian Authority's finances. Part of this hole may have been filled by the 800 million Drudge mentioned, but it is unclear.
Arafat commonly diverted charity donations meant for the Palestinian people into his personal finances, an action that US Congressional records have verified. And, Arafat's personal bank accounts and the Palestinian Authority finances often overlap, with only Arafat himself having an idea of the division between them. Still, there are no adaquate financial records to properly account for much of the money Arafat may or may not have.

roundup of news sources: BBC, World Tribune, News 24, Haaretz(Israeli newspaper, to clarify the name).

So Mch For "Up To The Minute" News

Nov 14th article, by CNN.

"Tonight on CNN: ...... nothing. We have nothing to report. This entire network has no idea what's happening anywhere around the world. We don't even know who our own reporters are. In fact, for the last six months, we've just shown tapes of random New Yorkers acting like journalists and 'reporting' something that sounds remotely like it could be a story.
And, on Larry King Live: Live coverage of CNN's reenactment of Howard Dean's fall from grace. We also have a scientist explain why that fall from grace appeared to triple the force of gravity. Yes, for the first time in years, one of our stories has some gravity. Even though real journalists prefer the other definition of gravity, this minor error is well within our standards."

I believe I’ve already debunked the article. In short: Big Media complains that blogs published the early exit polls. The media is doing this to draw attention away from their own horrendous coverage, and blame their new competitors (bloggers) for the network’s failures. However, the mainstream media didn’t clearly announce the exit poll numbers (they danced around them, which actually ticks off the viewers who want actual data and facts) because they didn’t want to repeat the Florida 2000 fiasco. If not for the fear of Florida 2000 Version2.0, the media would be singing the numbers. Fox, the first network to call Florida or Ohio, didn’t even call the states until Bush’s lead was far greater than the number of uncounted ballots.
I should note that the networks called Pennsylvania within a few minutes, even though it was quite obvious that only some of the Philadelphia votes were counted at the time (it was 85% Kerry, 15% Bush. Obviously, that violates the “swing state” status of Pennsylvania). Kerry’s victory in Philadelphia was closer than Bush’s in Florida or Ohio, I believe.

Let me quote CNN, then rip them apart in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Kahn:

Ana Marie Cox and others who maintain "blogs" were criticized after the November 2 presidential election for posting exit polls throughout the day -- a practice frowned upon in the mainstream media because the data could sway the outcome.

No one criticized the blogs, except the mainstream media. That’s like me stating “there are reports that CNN was overrun by retarded monkeys two years ago, and the monkeys have controlled the network ever since”, when those ‘reports’ are an earlier post by me stating “CNN’s been controlled by monkeys for two years”. The original post would be an obvious lie. However, the post describing the ‘reports’ from that obviously-BS article would be true – there are reports that retarded monkeys control CNN.
Networks have used methods like this for years to manufacture a story when there wasn’t anything worth reporting in the first place.

Now, the media doesn’t frown upon releasing election data. Networks called Florida for Gore when Florida had several hours of voting left. They didn’t say “there is data leading us to believe that Gore won Florida”, they said “Gore won Florida” outright. They even called New Jersey and New Hampshire for Kerry before any votes were counted in those semi-swing states. CNN actually states that the media does not try to “sway the outcome” of the election. The 2000 report that Bush had been arrested for drunk driving was certainly an attempt to sway that election outcome. Need I mention the entire CBS-MTV-Viacom conglomerate that was forging memos and trying to convince people that Bush would reinstate the draft? MTV’s Rock The Vote (which has hired former Clinton and Gore staff members, I believe) actually sent fake draft notices to people in swing states, hoping to scare them into voting for Kerry. How about ABC’s Mark Halperin, who claimed that the media should ignore Kerry’s numerous lies (‘because they aren’t critical to his campaign’, which is complete BS, they were the foundation of his campaign for months, and were important right up to election day) to go after Bush whenever possible? CBS stopped doing actual interviews with anti-Bush authors at least a year ago, and they turned the reports into Bush-bashing festivals – where both the author and the journalist would take turns insulting the president. The only non-cable network that didn’t try to commit suicide in this election was NBC. And, guess what; NBC had the highest ratings on election night. ABC came in a somewhat-close second, and CBS was nowhere to be found.

Want to know why blogs have become so popular? It’s because the major media has memorized the DNA sequence of Scott Peterson, and everything else slightly related to him. NO ONE CARES about Peterson, Mark hacking, Michael Jackson, or Mike Tyson. And, the only people who care about Kobe Bryant are the ones who have him on a fantasy basketball team. You all ignored monumentous elections in Afghanistan to investigate the artificial flavoring of Scott Peterson’s dinner on the Sunday before he killed his wife. Peterson won’t get the death penalty for any crime-related reasons, he’ll get the death penalty because everyone on earth would rather kill him than see another useless “wife-killer update: Peterson wears olive-colored socks, and ties his left shoe before his right”. Peterson’s been convicted, it’s about time we give him the electric chair! Strap him into Ol’ Sparky and flip the switch!

AND, WE DON’T CARE ABOUT SOME STUPID BOAT WITH SIX PEOPLE THAT MANAGED TO FLIP OVER, EITHER! If the only weekend story you can find is a boat off the coast of Oregon or New York that managed to flip over, and some passengers didn’t wear life jackets, then you should try to hire a journalist and buy a computer with a 56k internet connection. You’re getting clobbered because the internet provides much better news than you; there’s a lesson to be learned from that. It’s not hard to find ‘fresh’ stories on Sudan, because you never mention Sudan, so any story is still fresh!

You claim it’s unethical to interfere with the election on Election Day, but you do nothing except interfere in the Scott Peterson and Kobe Bryant cases. What’s next? Are you going to interview O.J. Simpson and ask, “If you were Scott Peterson, how would you kill the wife?” Actually, they’d probably have OJ on with Mark Hacking, as they are both wife-stabbers.


CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, fnCNN, CNN Headline News, and CNBC; start acting like decent journalists! From this point on, the internet will whack you over the head for every error you make. It’s not hard for billion-dollar networks to beat a few college kids with a Dell and DSL internet connection. Simply start finding good sources and resources, have journalists and analysts who know what they are doing, fire the Jason Blair-esque morons who write pure fiction, stop paying talking heads 50 million per year, cut your advertising budget because advertisements do nothing when everyone knows you suck, and – finally – show some backbone. You are afraid to call states for Bush when it’s obvious Bush will win, you won’t mention that Arafat was the founding father of modern terrorism, and you clearly are afraid of everything around you. The only people you attack are Bush and his administration! For the first time in years, don’t focus on ratings, start actually reporting the news!

Proposal For 'Iraqi People's Freedom Trust' - A Public Fund From Oil

excellent article

...There is, in fact, a war-winning weapon close to hand that the Allawi government could use – with support from allies and from both Democrats and Republicans. This weapon could, at a stroke, put flesh on the bones of formal democracy, change the dynamic of the insurgency, begin to win the confidence of the Iraqi people and create a powerful, growing force for stability, national unity and economic development. The weapon, of course, is oil -- and the huge flows of cash it generates.

The way to deploy it is straightforward. Iraq’s new government should simply announce that as of a date certain, it will establish a new national investment fund – call it The Iraqi People's Freedom Trust – which will be credited with a major share of all future Iraqi oil earnings. A popular real world model might be the Alaska Permanent Fund, which grants a share of that state’s oil revenues to every citizen. Revenues directed to Iraq’s Freedom Trust could be invested in Iraqi government bonds, keeping a small cash reserve to provide for cash withdrawals from the Trust by individual Iraqis.

All 27 million Iraqis – men, women and children – would be eligible for an equal, personal account in the Freedom Trust simply by proving Iraqi birth and pledging their allegiance to the government. With assistance from coalition allies, registration for ownership shares in the trust could go hand in hand with registering citizens for the upcoming national elections. Any adult citizen of Iraq would then be free, at any time, to ask for a calculation of their account’s value and withdraw up to their full balance – no questions asked.
...
Offering all Iraqis an equal, permanent – and possibly rising – future income stream would rapidly move resources out to remote regions and jump-start broad-based entrepreneurship and local development more efficiently than any centralized aid scheme. Instead of having to wait for political officials and aid workers to design, approve and deliver on projects, poor and rural Iraqis who have never seen a dime’s worth of their nation’s oil wealth would have a strong incentive to come to town, register for accounts in the Trust and claim a share of their own nation’s wealth.

Word of the first cash redemptions from the Trust would spread like wildfire, build its credibility and create a strong, growing interest among all ethnic and confessional groups and tribes in ensuring their nation's future stability.

Not a bad idea. I do have some worries, however, that many people will still be too cautious to give government their money, and make instant withdrawls. Additionally, I fear the possibility of a market crash in which everyone tries to withdrawl their money, when much of it may be invested in businesses or unavailable for a short period of time (banks or government offices could simply run out of cash, because they rarely keep all assets nearby). If Iraq somehow managed to pay for all the withdrawls quickly, there would be a huge inflation problem. Plus, it would be a giant bank account that a corrupt leader could pillage.
But, I think some dividends from the fund would help encourage people to keep money in it. Also, a way for government to slightly modify interest rates would help the government to control inflation and encourage or discourage personal savings (depending on what would help the market more in the long term).

Tennessee Ready To Scrap Socialized Medicine

small article

A trial balloon for socialized medicine (nicknamed "Hillarycare", due to Clinton's support of it), called "Tenncare", has failed. Tenncare is being scrapped to avoid gigantic expenses, which are well known to socialized healthcare systems. A pronounced problem with this program is that 28% of Tenncare users saw their doctor monthly, compared to 11% overall. Additionally, 7% of Tenncare saw their doctor weekly, compared to 3% overall. This isn't necessarily bad, as it may indicate that people who need to see their doctor do so, and avoid more costly surgeries. However, this could be caused by some unnecessary legislation, such as requirements for new prescriptions on drugs which the government classifies as "controlled substances" (some of which, like concerta, are used frequently for ADD or ADHD, which everyone seems to have nowadays). Because some ADD-causing chemical seems to be in water, perhaps government should put small amounts of concerta in that same water to counteract the ADD-causing substance? At the least, this would prevent the ADD-ers from forgetting to take their medicine, which is a large problem and due entirely to the nature of ADD.
To return to the topic; socialized medicine has failed in Tennessee. Even though Tenncare covered relatively few people, it had huge costs that the state could not afford. I expect the same to be true for any national healthcare system, because healthcare costs are simply more than the US economy is really able to cover. Much of this cost is due to research and the high prices of new medical tools, so one of the best ways to lower healthcare costs would be to end development in the field of medicine. Of course, no one wants to do this, so the US is faced with either high healthcare costs or a cultural shift against the "every life is important" mentality, so that medical technology will not develop as quickly. The "every life is important" mentality formed after WWI, and it can be traced by reaction to war casualties. WWI saw huge casualties, and so did WWII. Casualties were actually quite acceptable in WWI, and only marginally less so in WWII. By Vietnam and Korea, however, large casualties were not acceptable, though some loss of life was expected and tolerated. By the Black Hawk Down incident, the Gulf War, and Gulf War II/Iraqi Liberation, casualties are unacceptable. In fact, America can no longer allow deaths of foreign civilians, either. Hell, we don't even approve of killing the enemy, though they actually hope to die when fighting us.

Arafat Officially, Without A Doubt, Completly, and Irrevivably Dead

I already have my comments on how this affects the larger political situation here.

To summarize, what Palestine needs to do is:
1: grant powers to a 'temporary minister' (already done)
2: ensure loyalty of the military and police, maybe by doubling their salaries, to prevent them from attempting a coup.
3: keep the population under control. A motivated military and police can help do this, but they are stretched a bit thin. Free food always seems to make people happy, no matter what condition they are in.
4: either appease or eliminate paramilitary groups like Hamas. Appeasement would require the groups leaders to be given high government positions now (the groups will not trust the government to uphold promises, for good reason). Elimination requires the leaders and suppliers of the groups to be killed, thus decentralizing them - this may do little in the short term, but it will work in the long term.

All this is easier if people believe Arafat is not yet dead. I have a suspicion that he is either already dead, or will die within a few weeks. If things go badly, Palestine will become decentralized (the only comparison I can make is to Somalia, and that is a bad comparison), in which case and Isreali-Palestinian peace is impossible because there would be no one to enforce it on the Palestinian side.


On November 4th, The Economist released an article (here) that echoes my points; mainly the need to ensure the loyalty of Palestinian police and to work with Sharon to stabilize the situation in whatever way possible.

Personally, I am unsure of how to analyze the placing of Palestine’s security forces on standby. It could either be a legitimate effort to maintain stability, or it could be preparation for a military coup.


My worse-case-scenario for this event is for Palestine to descend into a Somalia-like state (this has little to do with the Black Hawk Down incident). By this, I mean that Palestine could decentralize and eventually eradicate the Palestinian government, thereby allowing warlords to exert control in whatever way they choose. Warlord rivalries prevent any form of legitimate government returning, unless the international community makes an incredible effort to conquer Palestine and build a new government for it.
In this case, a peace with Israel is also impossible. A peace requires the leaders on each side to enforce the terms on their own people. Without a Palestinian leader, there would be no one to enforce the peace treaty in Palestine, and the treaty is doomed to fall apart.

If this happens, the hopes for an Israeli-Palestinian peace would vanish, and Palestine would stay in anarchy indefinitely, thereby continuing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict indefinitely.



That summary was written on the 6th (and posted by me in a comment on the Belmont Club), and had only minor changes from earlier versions a day or two before. It is still very relevant, and turned out to be incredibly accurate. A calm in the Israel-Palestinian relations has already been made in allowing Arafat to be burried, but that temporary peace is intended for a lot more than to let Arafat be burried easily.

Once Again, Bush Wants To Drill Alaska - And He Is Right

7 billion barrels of oil are estimated to lie under the 1002 portion of ANWR, the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (in non-barreled form, of course). News article, MIT research data, official ANWR website.
Due to strict government regulations, only the 1002 area of ANWR can be developed, and the rest must remain untouched. The Coastal Plain area of Anwar lies 65 miles to the east of oil fields which are responsible for 25% of the US’s domestic oil production. However, these fields have begun to drop in production, and new fields have not been located nearby to compensate. The Coastal Plain of ANWR is a bit larger than the state of Delaware. ANWR, as a whole, is larger than West Virginia (source). When considering the highest possible costs for environmental damage, the profit of drilling outweighs the cost by 5 to 1.

Now, about these costs. The ‘protected wildlife’ in ANWR is the Porcupine Caribou. In similar locations where oil is being drilled, the caribou population actually rose. Not rose by a little; rose by a lot: the Central Artic Caribou Herd grew from 3,000 to 32,000 since the creation of the Prudhoe Bay oil drills. The reason for this is very simple, but often overlooked: caribou do not like to freeze to death. The oil pipes and buildings produce heat (the pipes in particular are good heaters, as the oil running through them is quite hot, because hot oil goes through a pipe much easier than cold oil), and caribou have conglomerated around the oil pipes due to the heat. This probably increases breeding habits, and helps prevent some of the animals from freezing to death during extremely cold periods. Rather than harm the wildlife, development for oil production helps the wildlife.

The portion of ANWR that could be drilled is only 8% of the entire Refuge. Additionally, between 250,000 and 735,000 jobs would be created by drilling in the reserve. Plus, 75% of Alaskans want to drill ANWR, including the Eskimos who live in and near the region. The entire top-10 list can be found here. There is actually no reason to oppose drilling in ANWR, with the exception of trying to win the vote of a few moronic ‘environmentalists’ who think all human products should be eradicated to ‘help protect the environment’. These are the same type of environmentalists, mind you, that I mentioned here.

US Begins Major Operation in Fallujah

DefenseLINK News: Iraqi, U.S. Troops Begin 'Al Fajr' Operation in Fallujah

The US plans to conduct the invasion mostly at night, because US troops have night vision goggles while terrorists don't. Additionally, snipers and robots are expected to see extensive use in the operation. American snipers have undergone training for urban warfare recently (though snipers often do poorly in dense urban situations. This, however, depends entirely on the layout of the city). Night battles help limit civilian casualties, add a lot of attrition (losses or difficulties not due to direct combat, such as lack of sleep for several days), and will likely allow our troops to take the best possible positions in relative safety.
This will probably be the most watched battle in history, and the military intends for it to be. They allow for extensive media coverage to emphasize the danger to civilians in the area and encourage them to leave, and to alert them of particularly dangerous periods.

American machinery includes a sturdy robot called Dragon Runner, which can be guided around corners to check for enemies. This machine can be dropped out of a hum-vee going 25 mph or thrown from a 2nd story window. Additionally, marines have a 5-pound flying machine named Dragon Eye, which can travel 35mph scouting for enemies (with low-light and infrared cameras). This toy can operate for nearly an hour before needing a recharge. These are laptop controlled, and there are 35 sets of the toy in use in Iraq. Each set comes with three of the aircraft.

Coalition troops have captured a/the main hospital in the city for publicity and practical reasons. In the first invasion of Fallujah, insurgents threatened doctors so casualty reports would be inflated. This caused a public backlash in the US, resulting in the troops to be pulled out of the city. I believe CNN claimed the hospital would be used to treat any wounded, but that claim is BS. Certainly the hospital may be used to treat any wounded, but the US has probably set up a medical facility outside the city. We've had troops surrounding the city for months, so there would have been plenty of time. It is estimated that 50,000 to 60,000 of Fallujah's population of 300,000 civilians are still in the city.

There are reports that tunnels have been dug between mosques so terrorists can ferry supplies when needed. Mosques are accorded protected status under international law due to cultural significance, but that status is dropped once they are used for military purposes. If tunnels are being dug between mosques, they can be blocked easily once US troops find them. A bunker-busting weapon could collapse a tunnel, and a claymore mine might ensure that anyone going through the tunnel is eradicated.

The claims that America will be bogged down in urban warfare are myths. American troops have proven quite creative when engaging in urban warfare, and tactics have been adjusted based on earlier, similar battles.

In the event of an assault, said Pike, U.S. forces would be likely to divide Fallujah into sectors and station two- to four-man sniper teams in each sector -- positioned for a wide field of vision -- as Marine patrols move through the city, checking building after building for insurgents, flushing them out into the snipers' field of fire. A similar tactic was used with considerable success last April before the earlier assault on Fallujah was called off, Pike said.

from here


A large, quite detailed map of Fallujah can be found here, and a smaller version is here.

Why Talking Heads On Both SIdes Are Wrong

Recently, the media has been claiming that Bush won based on ‘moral values’, as though gay marriage amendments on the ballot somehow gave him the election. Pundits from the right have gone after Arlen Specter because he is not pro-life enough. Additionally, Republicans have been fantasizing about what to do with Bush’s new “mandate”. Finally, the left has been attacking Bush for interpreting his win as a “mandate”. They are all wrong.

People have claimed that “close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades”, and that Bush has a free reign to embark on his plans. However, the simple-minded pundits do not realize that politics is a lot like hand grenades. I chastise the right-wing spokesmen who proclaim that Bush can now pursue a conservative agenda, after the US has endured the partisanship of this election and hoped that November 3rd would come sooner. This election only appointed a candidate, not an entire ideology and agenda - and extremists on both sides are wrong to think otherwise. Now, it is a time for America to solve problems with logic, reason, and consideration. Partisanship has fulfilled its task, and now must be disregarded because America has problems to fix. Problems which one side alone cannot - and should not be able to - solve. We all know the ends to which we all, as Americans, aspire: safety, respect from the world, prosperity, health, a peaceful retirement, and opportunities for our youth or the youth of posterity. America has already chosen the leader who shall guide this nation to reach these goals, to the extent that humanity can in four short years. Now, America is tasked with finding the way to these goals, and taking the path until we reach them. This is the duty of every American, and we must not stray from this duty, which we have assigned ourselves.

Our greatest threat is terror. If “the only thing to fear is fear itself”, we must not flinch, because terrorism is made to inspire fear - thus it makes itself our most ardent enemy. We all know terrorism is created by hatred and ideologies, and has no leaders other than those whom we symbolize to represent all of the evilness that faces us. We consider individuals the “leaders” or “masterminds” of terror because we would rather face a human enemy than an ideology – because we think that an ideology can not be killed. To fight terrorism we must realize its nature, and combat the ideology in whatever way we can. We have already started. America must commit to changing the face of the Middle East and all regions that replicate it. We must force freedom, independence, liberty, and everything to which all humans aspire down the throat of the captive world (“unfree world”, if you prefer) to eradicate the beliefs that seek to destroy us all. If we try as we know we must, America can not fail, and the world will be a better place for all humanity.

We also want to be respected in a peaceful world. To do this, we, as a nation, must lead to make the world more peaceful and respectful. We must work with our friends and neighbors when we can, but be willing to go alone when none join us. The world needs resounding leadership to eradicate terror and tyranny where is nests, and a hand up to lift struggling nations out of poverty. Through this, America will earn its respect from contemporaries, and that respect will be prevalent when America is seen through the lenses of history.

Finally, we strive for prosperous and peaceful lives. The president must work to balance the needs of the retired with the needs of the young generation, so as not to help one by crippling the other. He also must work to ensure that healthcare, of one type or another, is available to all Americans. And, most challenging, he must build our economy so it will continue to lead the world and allow for the continued success of America and its citizens. The president can only lead us to these goals; we must fulfill our tasks to reach them.


John Kerry stood on the far left bank of the mainstream, and Bush stands on the right. The Colossus kept one foot on each side to support its giant weight and power, and America must do the same, especially if it is also willing to carry the world on its shoulders. The Statue of Liberty, from toe to head, is the same height as The Colossus - for a very good reason. America, as a whole, must work for our endeavors. There is no place for partisanship, because Colossus needed a foot on each side so he could stand.

Once Again, Iran Insists ON Developing Nukes While Claiming It Has No Nuclear Weapons Program

article

Let me make this clear from the start: Iran is floating on oil. The nations doesn't need nuclear power, because it has more oil than it can ever hope to pump.

Now, to pick my favorite quotes:

"At the end of difficult talks, the two parties made considerable progress toward a provisional agreement on a common approach on these issues," the French Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

To put in non-aristocracy terms; 'we are getting close to the possibility that, in the far future, there is a chance we may begin to see things the same way'. Or, to further reduce to layman's terms; 'damn, we got nothing'.

Long story short: US and Europe want Iran to stop enriching uranium because Iran wants to use uranium in weapons. Iran claims it doesn't want to use uranium in weapons, and tries to find a reason that the weapons-grade uranium could be used in a nuclear power plant (nuclear power plant-type uranium is nowhere near as enriched as weapons-grade uranium). Diplomats and policy-makers all over the world see through Iran's lie, which is so stupid and blatant that it's quite insulting. Then, Iran still refuses to stop enriching uranium and claims weapons-grade uranium is Iran's "sovereign right that it will never abandon" (quoted from the article, not any particular person). And that's where we are now.

At the least, Europe had respectable demands: Iran to stop weapons-grade uranium enrichment indefinitely. The IAEA has offered to supply Iran with all the uranium that nuclear power plants could ever use, and Iran would have to turn over the used uranium to ensure that none was being used to make weapons. Iran has proven beyond the reasonable doubt that it wants nuclear weapons.

Job Growth Jumps, But Is Restrained By Labor Force Growth

article
337,000 new nonfarm jobs were created in October, while the unemployment rate climbed from 5.4% to 5.5%. The hiring nearly doubled expectations, which were set low after a disappointing September. However, the labor force increased by 367,000 people. Nonfarm jobs do not correlate directly to employment, which is based on overall employment compared to the civilian labor force (official data and descriptions are here).
The size of the labor force often is more important than the numbers of jobs created, and often fluctuates more (though it almost always increases each month). From August to September, the labor force actually shrunk, and compensated for an overall loss of jobs, to lower the number of unemployed by 19,000.
Productivity, the magic behind the US's manufacturing sector - allowing continued production despite layoffs - incresed by 4.3% for manufacturing, and 2.3% for overall businesses from quarter 2 of 2004 to quarter 4 of 2004. This is a good sign for US manufacturing, but not for short-term employment (greater productivity generally leads to lower employment in the short-term, because fewer people are needed to complete a task).

Economists continue to be worried by several aspects of the US economy; little personal savings (for retirement and whatnot) and the prospect of inflation. Low savings may cost the US in the long-run, once the baby boomer generation retires, and contributes to the US's trade deficit. This trade deficit combined with the Federal debt worried many economists, but the administration hopes to grow the US economy in order to limit and eventually alleviate these problems. Inflation always worries economists, and has increased slightly due to the lack of long-term investment like personal savings (which takes money out of the market, and therefore reduces inflation). However, higher US interest rates are scheduled for the future, and this should help limit inflation.

A second Bush administration, however, may work to crack China's economy open. This would increase US exports, thus shrinking the trade deficit, and allowing China's overvalued currency (which has fueled China's exports) to be affected by the market to properly adjust the value.
Additionally, retirement age will need adjustment, sooner or later. Longer lifespans have contributed to the ever-growing healthcare and social security costs, as retirees live for many more years than expected when the programs were first presented. Due to the unpopularity of raising the retirement age, no president would do so in a first term, but at least a small adjustment is needed to compensate for the retired baby-boomer generation.

The Euro recently hit a high compared to the dollar, but this is not a good sign for Europe. The Euro is already overvalued, and some economists say that a good way to limit this overvaluation is to fund the US deficit. That strong Euro, however, has helped Europe cope with high energy prices.
Europe has a greater long-term problem; low birthrates, unemployment, and overuse of social security/welfare programs. France's population is in a worrying decline, alleviated only slightly by immigration. A shrinking population means that fewer workers will be supporting retirees, who already use much of Europe's economy for social security and healthcare (though healthcare is worse for the elderly than it is for the employed, due to government regulations to limit expenses).

Personally, I think there are some additional factors to the US economy (I'm no economist, so these are uneducated opinions at best). First, with some luck, oil prices should decline within the next 6 months as Iraq improves. Second, Bush's costly education and scientific policies may pay off in the next decade. The 58% increase in education funding is already showing promise, and Bush want to extend No Child Left Behind to highschools. Education policies usually take many years to show effects, simply because education takes over a decade and has no clear barometer. Additionally, NASA makes a tenfold (or more) profit for the government over the long term, due to the new technologies and products that the agency creates.
These programs should propel the US technological lead, which has maintained the US economy despite expensive labor costs and regulations. To best benefit from this, the US must enforce copyrights on China, which copies every product it can find (including parts from the US spyplane that crashed in China during the Clinton administration).


That's my economic summary for the day.

Netherlands Movie Director Killed, Death Threat To Politician Pinned To Corpse

article
The killed person created a movie called "Submission", which accurately criticized Islam's treatment of women. The director, and a politician who helped write the script, had been threatened for several months. Just a few days ago, the threats were carried out on the director, who was stabbed (and possibly shot) repeatedly when leaving his car. Apparently, a threat to the politician was pinned to the corpse with a knife. Earlier, witnesses had said the killer lingered over the body as though to ensure the victim was dead, which explains the placement of the note. Several Muslim extremists have been arrested in connection with the murder, and it is believed that the murderer is one of them.

Arafat Approaching Death

Reuters article

Yasser Arafat was critically ill in a French military hospital on Friday after falling into a coma, and a senior official said some of the Palestinian president's powers had been handed to his prime minister.

Aides said the condition of the 75-year-old leader, a decades-old symbol of the Palestinian struggle against Israel for a state, deteriorated on Thursday.

But the aides and a hospital spokesman denied reports he was dead. They also dismissed reports he was brain dead, although the exact nature of his illness remained unclear.

"President Arafat is in a very serious condition," said one senior Palestinian official, declining to be named. "He is still in a coma. The sense people are getting is that they are increasingly pessimistic."

This is not good, in my opinion. Palestine has been led almost entirely by Arafat, and there is little uniting the proto-nation other than him (paramilitary groups like Hamas do not unite a nation). If Arafat dies without a recognized and competent successor, all hopes for a peace with Israel are out of the question. This is because it is impossible to make peace with a leaderless nation; the leaders on each side must enforce the treaty on their own people, and a leaderless nation allows anarchy in foreign relations because the population has little reason to obey limits.

If Arafat is dying, here’s what should be done: First, have some power legally transferred to a legitimate leader (a video of Arafat declaring a ‘temporary minister’ for his absence would be great, if Arafat is still able to talk). Then, over a period of several months, give all governmental power to the ‘temporary minister’, and maintain strict discipline over the military and police, which are the largest threat to the Palestinian government. Third, make some short-term peace deal with Israel, so Palestine can focus on reorganizing its government, rather than trying to restrain militants or fighting its neighbor. If you can crack down on groups like Hamas, do so, as they are on the top-5 list of threats. After working out a cease-fire with Israel (which shouldn’t take that long, given the circumstances), double the salary of the military, police, and bodyguards to ensure that they are loyal and can not threaten a coup. It doesn’t matter where this money comes from – as long as it’s not stolen from the Palestinian population – the government could probably take a bit out of Arafat’s personal bank account, which is rumored to hold around 1 billion US.
Once this is done, the government must hold control over the population. The military’s increased salary will keep them happy if they have to work overtime a bit, so this should help prevent citizens from staging a revolt. However, the military and police are quite thin, so the government must find some way to keep the people happy. Free food is often a good way to make poor, hungry people happy, so that may work, depending on how hungry people are (if at all).
Groups like Hamas are unlikely to overlook the power vacuum, so they must either be appeased or suppressed. Appeasement would require a false promise to give them legitimate power, and that power must be given soon so the paramilitaries have some reason to trust the government (promises for positions after the government switches hands are rarely acceptable because there is no incentive to grant power once the government changes hands). Suppressing the paramilitaries would be hard, but is possible over a few months. The entire leadership and suppliers must be eliminated, thus destroying the organization of the groups, and they should either split apart or be inoperable for several months. This, however, is quite risky.


I believe steps like these may be of some use if Palestine is to endure Arafat’s death. If the nation is not prepared to exist without Arafat, it will dissolve into a paramilitary-controlled state without any real government or hope for improvement, and might be similar to Somalia or other paramilitary-controlled states.

However, I doubt there is enough time or capability in the hands of Palestine’s government. Arafat may already be dead, in which case Palestine just might be doing something like what I suggest, because the plan requires people to believe Arafat is still alive for several weeks or months.

The major issue is the future state of Palestine: will it have a centralized government or a Somalia-like anarchy with paramilitaries running around?

When Egg Is On Your Face, Blame The Bloggers!

Yahoo! News - Bloggers Said to Blame for Bad Poll Info

News organizations promised Wednesday to look into why their Election Day exit polls showed an initial surge for John Kerry, but also blamed bloggers for spreading news that gave a misleading view of the presidential race.

The exit poll data was delivered at several points Tuesday to ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox News Channel and The Associated Press by the National Election Pool, a company formed in the wake of the networks' blown calls on election night 2000.
...
The Florida and Ohio exit poll results, along with those in other states were Kerry was strong, was quickly disseminated on Web sites such as Slate, the Drudge Report, Wonkette.com, Atrios.blogspot.com and Command Post.

Some of these sites cautioned readers not to make too much of the information. The Command Post delivered the news under the headline "Grain of Salt." Drudge removed the numbers almost as quickly as they were posted. And Slate warned: "these early exit poll numbers do not divine the name of the winner."

"I didn't have any real compunction about putting it up there," said Alan Nelson, co-manager of The Command Post. "I didn't struggle with the decision, because I knew it was going to become a global news item within about 30 seconds.

"Our approach is: We post, you decide," Nelson said.

But the people who read these numbers — among them, thousands of ordinary Americans with an intense interest in the election — put too much faith into them and leaped to conclusions, said Bill Schneider, CNN's polling expert.

"I think people believed them, and it's particularly the case with Internet bloggers," said Kathy Frankovic, CBS News' polling director. "That's unfortunate because it sets up expectations that may or may not be met. I think it's a good exercise because it reminded people that early exit polls can be unreliable."

Bloggers picked out different numbers to use for their purposes, said Joseph Lenski, who ran the poll with partner Warren Mitofsky for the NEP. As the day wore on, later waves of exit polling showed the race tightening.

Let me summarize: "we blame the bloggers for the sucky polling data, which we prominently used except when we acted like pussies because we live in fear of repeating 2000. However, many blogs managed to predict the election almost perfectly, take me as an example:
I not only expected Bush to get Ohio and Florida, but I cited either or both New Mexico and Colorado to Bush, and one of the Great Lakes states (Iowa, Wisconsin, ect) to go to Bush, and it looks like Iowa may fulfill this prophecy. Additionally, I cited Zogby's claim that Virginia will be a tiebreaker as an error, correctly called Pennsylvania for Kerry a few times, and was even correct that Ohio would count very slowly (not to mention, end up Bush). My only error was that both New Mexico and Colorado went Bush, but I believe I allowed for this possibility. Perhaps I should have made a prediction for the popular vote, but I am overjoyed with my accuracy nonetheless.
I believe that Fox finally called Florida for Bush after 93% of ballots were counted (if not more), and when Bush led by 5%. That’s not a prediction, it’s a late acknowledgement of a fact. Other networks were slow to agree, and about 99% of Ohio was counted with Bush leading by 2-3% before anyone in the major media even thought about calling it for Bush.

Guess what major media – you suck! Your pundits were wrong, while this little highschool student - sitting at a Pentium 4 without costly statistics and election programs and trying to stream internet radio while updating election results on a 56k modem (one of the two crashes, and both are very slow) – managed to be almost exactly right, and had the backbone to say so when it was relevant.

It’s no surprise that CBS is going after bloggers, while Fox doesn’t seem to be doing so. That’s because CBS has a vendetta (that they may never fulfill, I hope), while Fox actually did some real journalism and investigation.

Overall, however, this entire story is a flimsy attempt at an excuse. The bloggers grabbed polling data from the media or from the same sources as the media, so the Network News has no basis for their complaint, except to whine that bloggers were right while the so-called ‘credible’ networks were wrong. This is little more than an attempt to compete with bloggers, because the TV News has realized that it is unable to keep up, much like newspapers were unable to keep up with live broadcasts. This time, however, the networks should be more up-to-date than bloggers, not to mention more accurate considering they actually have a staff and budget.

Kerry Campaign Fires Defeat Flare - Prepares For Court

Some voters have just been put on TV with the complaint that he arrived at the poll at 1:30 PM and voted at around midnight, or so he claims. This is what the democrats may use for disenfranchisement claims. This is the clear sign that Bush has won Ohio. The media did not show this type of thing before because it was not important, but now might be evidence in court. For a clear ictory, Bush needs to win Ohio by 50,000 votes at the least, and probably 100,000 votes. Otherwise, this will get tied up in courts, and the only real winners will be lawyers.

I Predict Ohio For Bush

I've said Bush will get Ohio quite a few times, and I'll stick with that prediction until I chack again tomorrow, when almost all ballots will be counted. Right now, 70% of Ohio has been tabulated, and is 52-48 Bush. Ohio is the linchpin in this election, and it's winner will take the White House.

Bush Has Florida

94% of Florida has been counted, Bush leads 52-47. With only 6% of votes left, Bush has won Florida. So, I'm calling this state (well, I called it weeks ago, but now my call is final), though the rest of the media is too paranoid of being wrong to call the state.
New Hampshire is 60% counted, Kerry barely leads 49-50. The state can move either way, but I expect it to go to Kerry. New Jersey is 91% counted, showing 46-53 for Kerry. Michigan is 29% counted, 45-54 Kerry, and depends entirely on whether or not Detroit has been counted yet. Pennsylvania is 69% done, going 44-56 Kerry, and will probably stay Kerry.

Drudge Shows New Hampshire Leaning Bush

I have no idea what Drudge is using to determine this, but my latest numbers have a dead tie with 44% of votes count.

Some people have cited Ohio's gay marriage amendment as a reason to predict that Ohio will go Bush. I despise this amendment. Specifically, it has two sentences: the first defines marriage as between a man and a woman; the second prohibits any civil union-ish things "intended" to mimic marriage. Even if this passes, I believe that any judge would have to turn the amendment down, because it specifically requires judges to determine the intent of the lawmakers. This, in fact, is the very thing the anti-gay marriage crowd complains about – judges interpreting the intention of the Founding Farmers. Additionally, I think this may backfire just like the alcohol prohibition did. The amendment may force gay couples to live together and completely circumvent marriage, much like straight couples that live together for years and raise children but do not get married. These unmarried couples are, in my opinion, a greater threat to marriage than gay couples, because the movement for gay marriage shows that homosexuals respect the institution of marriage.

From North Dakota To Texas, All Bush

From preliminary results, the strip from North Dakota to Texas, including Wyoming, are likely going to Bush.
Additionally, Matt Drudge seems to have his own election map in which he reports Michigan leaning to Bush. If this is true, I will be amazed. My numbers show that 3% of Michigan has been counted, and Bush only leads 52-47. Unless these numbers are all from Detroit, I don't see Michigan going Bush. Maybe it can go 52-47ish for Kerry, but switching to Bush entirely would be amazing.
Pennsylvania is finally starting to count decent numbers of ballots, and has Kerry winning 34-66% with 19% of votes counted (earlier, this was about 20-80% with around 5% counted). So, I expect that Philidelphia was counted early, and the suburban areas are starting to show results. If this is true, the numbers should close to within 55-45 with Kerry winning, in my opinion.
As I predicted, Ohio has been slow in counting, and has gone through only 16% if the ballots (in other words, is quite inconclusive), Bush leads 52-47.
Florida has counted 65% of ballots (they count fast nowadays), Bush leads 53-47. However, many southern precincts have not reported yet, and these usually lean to the democrat. Florida will likely depend on which precints managed to get the most voters, but I still expect it to go to Bush.

New Jersey Voting Closes - Tiny Fraction Of Votes Counted Plus, Bush Gets Virginia

Yahoo News page
When Jersey was first reported for Kerry, no votes were counted (interesting). Now, 7 of 6285 precincts have reported. Right now, Kerry has 48% (816 votes), while Bush has 51% (866 votes). Because votes are dependant largely on geography, it is probably possible to have 70% Bush and 15% Kerry in California, if you count in the right precints. In other words, these results are far less accurate than polls of around 1500 people.
So, there is a good chance that the nearly-instant call of Jersey for Kerry was a mistake (usually, states are called after a good variety of votes are counted, if not a substantial percent of the votes).

Additionally, Virginia has been called for Bush. 35 percent (826 of 2345 precincts) have been counted, 56% (566,284 votes) for Bush, 43% (440,770 votes) for Kerry. This is an excellent sign for Bush, as Zogby had predicted this to be a tied state, which I cited as an error. It now looks like I was more correct than Zogby for at least one minute factor of this election. I am proud of myself :).

With 1% (88 of 11477 precints) of Ohio counted, Kerry has 54% (96,790 votes), while Bush has 46% (82,262 votes). This one percent shows only that the state will likely be too close to call soon, and hints that the entire state may count votes slowly.

Election Results- Constantly Updated

Yahoo! News - Elections
This has all the states in an array, some updated with results as they are currently known. Florida has about 14% of votes counted now (8:10 PM EST), and is leaning 55-44 Bush.
Additionally, New Jersey has been called for Kerry almost immediately after polls close. This is a bad sign for Bush, as Jersey has been an off-and-on swing state. This suggests that Kerry may have more voters than expected in Jersey, and possibly in the nation.

The whistle-blower on the 2000 pre-made votes in Pennsylvania was (according to Glenn Beck) nearly the victim of a car jacking. Glenn Beck claims that he recently talked to a reporter for his flagship station, who said that they saw four large men approach the whistle-blower as he tried to enter the car. The whistle-blower was able to get into his car and sped away, but the four (possible) thugs got into their own car and chased after him.
This is just the most recent of Pennsylvania corruption claims. These thugs, if in fact they did try to attack the whistle-blower, should be locked up indefinitely. The same goes for whoever put the 2000 (to the best of my knowledge) votes on the machine before voting was supposed to take place.

Turnout Light In Heavily Kerry Areas?

Right now, I'm listening to Glenn Beck's live coverage on the election (special coverage, he's usually on from 9AM to noon EST), and the last poll watcher-ish person claimed that turnout is very low in some of Ohio's heavily democratic areas. This includes a region in which 100% of the votes in 2000 were for Gore (yes, 100%. That number should not be possible due to the spoilage rates, which indicate 98% at most, but aparently these voters were brilliant despite voting Gore). Though some Republican areas have been said to have two-hour lines, there were more election employees than voters in the last voting place. The interviewed person (not entirely named because exit-pollers arn't really allowed in Ohio) claimed similar goes for other areas that are projected to vote heavily Kerry.

21Zogby Predicts A Tie - Hinged on Pennsylvania And Virginia For Victor

Zogby International
If Zogby is right, the winner of Pennsylvania (21 electoral votes) will win the election, because Virginia (13 electoral votes) does not have the weight needed to decide the victor.
In the vast majority of polls, Pennsylvania went to Kerry, but the difference between the candidates was far lower than the margin of error (Kerry lead by around 2-4 percent).
Historically, Zogby is the most accurate of all pollsters (as testified here). However, in this election, Zogby has leaned slightly more to the Kerry side than most other polls (especially the Strategic Vision poll, which is consistently republican).
A tie-breaking Pennsylvania could be worse than 2000's Florida. Already, there have been reports that around 2000 votes were already listed on machines before voting was supposed to begin. Additionally, it is believed that several volunteers in one prison allowed all inmates to vote (they were not supervised and had very little training. The lack of supervision, to me, is very concerning), though only inmates who are not yet convicted have the legal right to vote. Convicted felons are heavily democrat. The Governor of Pennsylvania sent an unprecedented letter to all prison wardens insisting that unconvicted inmates are able to vote (this is perfectly legal, and probably recommended as it should have eliminated possible disenfranchisement). However, the military ballots were delayed by extensive disputes over if Nader qualifies, resulting in ballots being sent out late enough that very few would return by November 2nd, the deadline for absentee ballots. At first, the governor refused to issue an extension (even though he issued an extension earlier to allow a fellow Democrat to receive more votes, thus allowing that Democrat to win the election. This decision was, and still is, very controversial), but he has recently decided to accept all absentee ballots until November 10th. Military members vote somewhere between 70% and 75% republican.
Additionally, there are reports that power to the Philadelphia GOP headquarters was cut/failed for unknown reasons. The Kerry campaign headquarters, across the street, was not affected. However, I have only heard this on the radio once, and cannot find many recent news sources to substantiate or update this report.

Drudge, who has received 12 million visitors over the last 24 hours (is that a record for him? It seems extraordinarily high, even for him), has posted few updates since around 3 PM EST (it is now 6 PM EST)

Additionally, there is an excellent pledge by Jeff Jarvises:

no matter who wins:

I will not proclaim that the president is incompetent for failing to magically resolve some tough geopolitical situation, such as North Korea's nukes or the Israel/Palestine problem, unless I can propose something with stronger logic to recommend it than the fact that the president isn't doing it right now.

I will not obsess about trivial details of the president's demeanor, speech patterns, or long-past personal history.

I will not secretly hope that he fails at important goals so that I can elect someone from the other party four years hence.

I will not pretend that the president's budget is better, or worse, than it is, which is to say terrible.

I will not attribute magical powers to the president to heal the economy, large-scale social problems, or the growing rift between my boyfriend and myself on the matter of green vegetables. I will neither praise the president for improvement in these situations, nor criticise him for failing to mend them.

I will not point out all the bad news, or all the good news, while hoping no one notices the other sort.

I will ruthlessly make fun of the president's verbal tics, extravagent promises, and useless programmes.

I will not use my one semester of Psych 101 to make speculative diagnoses of mental disease or defect in the president.

I will assume, until proven otherwise, that the president, like most politicians, is making stupid laws because he wants to appease key interest groups (a.k.a. The American People), not because He Is Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil.

I will not write long, stupid posts on how the man I voted for, and his party, are wonderful people--intelligent, sensitive, and well-informed--while the other party, and its voters, are a bunch of moronic thugs who want only to Destroy a Once Great Nation. Nor will I deliver such rants in person.

I will not write anything containing the sentence "The administration has hit a new low . . . "

And if I have to listen to one more such, I'll pull my hair out, really I will. And it's such nice hair too, soft and shiny with natural ringlets. So can't we all just get along?

And, an election results schedule is here. 7:30 includes the Ohio closing, and 8:00 includes the end of voting in Pennsylvania, Florida, New Jersey, and a few other small yet important states. Apparently 8:00 will be the most important time, as it resolves most major battlegrounds and 2 of 3 states believed to determine the election (the three are Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida).
I believe Ohio and Florida will go to Bush. I have held this opinion for quite a while, and Zogby reinforces it. Pennsylvania has a 60% to 75% chance of going Kerry, in my opinion, and the state’s controversies have been a huge wildcard (they can either galvanize voters or push the state farther Kerry). Plus, I think at least one of the Northern, center-of-the-nation states that Zogby gave to Kerry will actually vote Bush (not Michigan, though. One word: “Detroit”). Finally, I doubt that both Colorado and New Mexico will go Kerry. At least one should end up Bush. Virginia, in my opinion, will go Bush, as this is the first time I’ve seen it vote Kerry, unless I have missed a lot of the electoral map. Virginia, at least one of the Northern states, and New Mexico or Colorado should give the election to Bush. New Jersey and New Hampshire will probably go Kerry (though Jersey may change in a reaction to their Governor’s appointment of his incompetent and unqualified boyfriend as head of the New Jersey Homeland Security department. That’s quite a reason to switch parties).
This election may turn out closer than I thought, but I believe it will go to Bush.

Some Liberal Californians Threaten To Leave US If Bush Wins - Thank God!

National Post article

Some left-leaning Californians say they would rather leave the United States -- and go to Canada or elsewhere -- than stay with George W. Bush as president.
...
There seems little doubt Californians will deliver the state's valuable 55 electoral votes to the Democratic candidate. In a poll on Friday, Mr. Kerry had a seven-point lead statewide, with a 24-point lead in Los Angeles county and a 35-point lead in the San Francisco Bay area.

But fear at what may happen in the key swing states of Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania has led to an escalation in coffee-shop chatter about emigration to Canada, Britain and elsewhere.

There can be no better reason to vote Bush than to get rid of liberal Californians.

However, it would be better if the coastal regions of California simply sank into the Pacific Ocean, while the inland, republican portion of the state remains. This would change California from a liberal to a conservative state, and thereby taking 55 electoral votes from Kerry and giving them to Bush. However, this is unlikely, especially in the limited timeframe between now and the point at which such a lack of Kerry voters would matter (a sinking only 10 minutes before the polls close wouldn't do all the much for this election, would it?)

Humanitarian And Environmental Groups Harm Humanity And The Environment

NGOs: Fighting Poverty, Hurting the Poor

The war against poverty is threatened by friendly fire. A swarm of media-savvy Western activists has descended upon aid agencies, staging protests to block projects that allegedly exploit the developing world. The protests serve professional agitators by keeping their pet causes in the headlines. But they do not always serve the millions of people who live without clean water or electricity.

The first page of the article presens one example, the next three explain a much larger and better-known situation (known due to bogus environmental/humanitarian claims), and the last page displays a short and modern scenario. The article is great, even for those without the time to read all five pages.

The Best Reason To Vote Against Kerry Is John Edwards

John Edwards is an incompetent, rookie senator who still looks more like a trial lawyer than a politician. He does not have enough experience to serve in the senate, much less the White House. His incompetence goes to the extent that he does not know enough to realize he is unable to fulfill the duties of a vice-president. Kerry should never have nominated him, and Edwards should not have accepted the nomination. However, both candidates were distracted by their own popularity and dream of entering the White House.
To me, it is clear that Edwards has no idea what he is doing. His home state may vote for him for vice president, but that is because they want to get rid of him, rather than promote him. Even for a single-term senator (and a very bad one, might I add), Edwards has gained little experience and understanding of how this nation and the world work, because he has spent much of his time campaigning.
A Vice President John Edwards would destroy much of the power of the office, because no one in government would trust Edwards with any power. Even worse, if something were to happen to Kerry, the new President Edwards would have no connections inside or outside the US, almost certainly be one of the worst presidents in American history, and would be unable to continue John Kerry’s policies (no matter how good or bad they are). The white House would approach a state of paralysis; and the nation would either be isolated from the rest of the world, or be exploited by the rest of the world.

Even if you love Kerry, you must admit that Edwards is not ready and unreliable at best.