Sunday, June 30, 2013

The Story of Qian Xuesen – A Serious Blunder Of The US Government?

Trigger

Today, I came across an article in Le Monde Diplomatique titled “A second cold war, this time in space/China goes ballistic” (subscription only) published in the May 2013 edition. The opening paragraph mentions “Just after the second world war, a young engineer from Hangzhou, Qian Xuesen, was working for the Pentagon at Caltech’s jet propulsion”.

This engineer died in 2009. The Ney York Times wrote an obituary about him, but left the circumstances of his return to Communist China in 1955 sketchy. To quote from this article (Emphasis added): “But by 1950 his American career was over. Shortly after applying for permission to visit his parents in the newly Communist China, he was stripped of his security clearance by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and accused of secretly being a Communist. The charge was based on a 1938 document of the Communist Party of the United States that showed he had attended a social gathering that the F.B.I. suspected was a meeting of the Pasadena Communist Party [Mr. Xuesen was a founder of the Pasadena Jet Propulsion Laboratory]. … Mr. Qian first sought to return to China but was placed under virtual house arrest by the government; later, he sought to stay and fight the accusations, but the government sought to deport him.
In 1955, Mr. Qian was sent back to China, where he was proclaimed a hero and immediately put to work developing Chinese rocketry. By many accounts, he later became a committed Communist and served on the party’s ruling body, the Central Committee.” For the LA Times obituary see here.

Released in 1955, in exchange for the repatriation of 11 US airmen captured by China/North Korea
during the Korean War

The Wikipedia article on Mr. Xuesen does not go into any details regarding his repatriation. Are the records still classified?

Is it indeed true that the US government released one of the top rocket scientists of the 20th century to Communist China in an exchange for a few prisoners of war?
Why did nobody sufficiently question the FBI allegations against this brilliant scientist?
Was this an attempt by the Eisenhower administration to create a counterweight in China to the Soviet Union?

The Stupidest Thing

The NYT article continues: “The loyalty allegations have never been fully resolved. Aviation Week, which named Mr. Qian its man of the year in 2007, quoted Dan Kimball, a former undersecretary of the Navy, as calling Mr. Qian’s deportation “the stupidest thing this country ever did.” A 1999 United States Congress report on Chinese espionage called Mr. Qian a spy, but critics say the report provides no basis other than a claim that he passed to China the secrets of the American Titan missile program, which began years after he had been deported.”


The Voting Rights Act of 1965 Is Outdated And Should Be Entirely Repealed

Voting Rights Act of 1965

This was an extraordinary act to address an exceptional situation allowing the Federal government to interfere with state, county, and municipal election administration. Once the exceptional situation has become insignificant or has been remedied, this act should be automatically be repealed.

The US constitution and the Declaration of Independence make such a Voting Rights Act entirely unnecessary. See e.g. the 14th and 15th Amendment of 1868 and 1870 respectively.

Why not repeal the old law and pass a new law should the exceptional situation still exists and let’s have a debate about it. This clinging to outdated and perhaps harmful laws is one of the significant nuisances of representative democracy.

The US Supreme Court Lauds The Act

In Shelby County v. Holder it reads: “There is no doubt that these improvements are in large part because of the Voting Rights Act. The Act has proved immensely successful at redressing racial discrimination and integrating the voting process. … Today both of those towns [Philadelphia, MS & Selma, AL] are governed by African-American mayors. Problems remain in these States and others, but there is no denying that, due to the Voting Rights Act, our Nation has made great strides.”

How much progress would have been made had the Voting Rights Act never been enacted? Does anyone really believe that without this Act there would not be African American mayors or US President today? Less draconian/authoritarian measures would have probably done the job as well. Future generations would have rejected racial discrimination anyway had the civil unrest and activism continued.

The Voting Rights Act was a big government wielding a big club thereby further undermining federalism in the USA.

US Supreme Court Justices Are Only Too Human

Given the centrist and leftist leanings of the Justices of the US Supreme Court the most recent decision on this Act (a 5 to 4 vote) can only be seen as some kind of awful compromise. The leftist Justices are like Soviet Comrades, basically always voting in unison even when their mediocre intellect should have told them otherwise, because of their ideological biases.

Another Renewal For 25 Years In 2006?

How much more stupid does it get? What were our elected representatives thinking?

Although the US Supreme Court previously warned the US Congress, our eager and inept lawmakers voted to renew this anachronistic law for another 25 years in 2006. It was dutifully signed into law by then President Bush, who rarely vetoed anything. Why he did not veto it is a mystery to me.

The Chief Justice Again

The Chief Justices legacy is already tarnished by his foolish decision on Obamacare. I blogged about this here, and here.

In Shelby County v. Holder he stated (emphasis and comment added):
1.       “Striking down an Act of Congress “is the gravest and most delicate duty this Court is called on to perform. … We do not do so lightly.” [Well, the Court did not really strike down the Act, it only corrected parts of it. It is actually the duty of the Judiciary to entirely strike down excessive laws enacted by legislatures.]
2.       “… we [US Supreme Court in 2009] expressed our broader concerns about the constitutionality of the Act. … “
3.       “Our decision in no way affects the permanent, nationwide ban on racial discrimination in voting found in §2.” [A superfluous statement as it is already covered by the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence.]

4.       “We issue no holding on the §5 itself, only on the coverage formula. Congress may draft another formula based on current conditions.” [Man, you got to make up your mind about whether this Act is constitutional or not. To encourage Congress to add more insult to injury is remarkable.]

Saturday, June 29, 2013

Leading Afghan Policy Advisor Comes Down Hard On Obama’s Administration

Preface

My previous, optimistic blog post about Afghanistan is here.

Source

The Wall Street Journal on its Opinion pages published a piece by Davood Moradian on 6/26/2013 titled “Taliban Guns Send a Message About Obama’s Peace Process” (Subscribers only).

Summary

Excerpts from the above mentioned article (Emphasis added) and comments:
1.       “Last week, US officials celebrated what they regarded as a diplomatic breakthrough. They had persuaded the Taliban to open a political office in Doha, Qatar … The Taliban had immediately begun … declaring the office as an outpost of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. … insulting Afghan sovereignty, also sent a degrading message to the millions who have been the victims of Taliban brutality. The Taliban are despised by the vast majority of the Afghan people, …” [Clearly, the Taliban have not given up on usurping the country again. What does the US President not understand when it comes to the Taliban and the Afghan people?]
2.       “On Monday [6/24/2013], the Taliban attacked the presidential compound in Kabul. President Karzai announced that he would not join peace negotiations with killers who had been so legitimized by the US.”
3.       “But despair and confusion cannot bring enduring peace, or even an honorable exit. Now with the U.S. endorsement of the Taliban office in Doha, the credibility and authority of the Afghan state has been undermined.” [After Vietnam Afghanistan?]
4.       “American eagerness to flee Afghanistan has left its civil society feeling betrayed.” [Well said! President Obama is an appeaser and fool!]
5.       “The U.S. gave the Taliban a prime propaganda victory and came away with nothing in exchange. The moment was more akin to appeasement than a peace process.” [Ouch, that sounds like a slap in the face!]
6.       “Last May, the U.S. and Afghanistan signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement that was meant to cement mutual respect and shared interests.” [Could this Afghan author be right? Does the US not treat Afghanistan as a partner?]
7.       “This year, the U.S. was hoping to secure a Bilateral Security Agreement defining the long-term military partnership between the two countries, … The … agreement has now been endangered by the Obama administration’s engagement with the Taliban.” [President Obama is an amateur/dilettante who negotiates with anyone unconditionally.]
8.       “Why has the U.S. refused to designate the Taliban as a terrorist organization since 1994?” [Hhm! Well the US State Department does indeed not list the Afghan Taliban as a terrorist organization, but the “Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan” is listed since 9/1/2010, but supposedly/reportedly not affiliated with former group. Thus, why indeed are the Afghan Taliban not designated?]
9.       “Westerners engaged in peace efforts are often hampered by a deficient understanding of Afghanistan. … Such ignorance is taken full advantage of by skilled players who have mastered the game of manipulating Westerners.” [Either this is just a rhetorical point about the stupid Westerners or there could be some truth to it. I tend to agree with the author. Afghanistan along the Silk Road has a very long and proud history. The British Empire failed were beaten in the first Anglo-Afghan war, the Soviet military had to go home with bloody noses.]
10.   “Peace is not a process to be determined and completed by the sort of deadlines and benchmarks that the Obama administration seems to prefer. Knowledge, skill, vision and perseverance are required.” [To fight wars or to achieve peace based on short-term deadlines or numerical benchmarks is indeed absurd. Only technocrats can up with something like that.]
11.   “President Karzai’s administration is exhausted. It does not have the necessary political and institutional energy to spend on the peace process in the 10 months remaining before the election of a new president.” [This admission comes from former senior member of President Karzai’s office. Looks like the Obama Team did not recognize this situation or ignored it.]

Why Are Members Of The US Congress Not Reachable By Direct E-mail?

The Issue

It appears that a number of members of the US Congress cannot be e-mailed directly by using an e-mail address to reach their office. What these antiquated Members still offer is a phone no, a fax no, a postal address, but you will not find an e-mail address.

What these elected Representatives offer is a cumbersome web based e-mail contact form. Not only that, you also come across following peculiar statements like:
“Regrettably, I am unable to reply to any email from constituents outside of the district. Please enter your zip code to verify residency and go to the next step”

How stupid is that? The reason why I tried to reach a particular member of the US Congress was that this person is also a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Of course, you can get around by just entering the Zip code of this Member’s district, but it is another nonsensical hassle.

What Is The Rationale Or Excuse?

I don’t know. May I venture to guess, to prevent spam or negative e-mail campaigns directed at them or …
Are they just not able or overwhelmed to handle large amounts of e-mail?

Unfortunately, in the 21st century, there is no good excuse anymore! There is software or services available to handle unwanted e-mail.

Perhaps only lobbyists and journalists are privy to our Representatives’ e-mail address?
Or are these Representatives just so aloof!

Case In Point: The House Judiciary Committee

Several days ago, I spend the time to fill out this above mentioned webform to contact the chairman of this committee, i.e. Mr. Goodlatte (by the way, an excellent last name) to ask why the Articles of Impeachment against President Nixon are nowhere to be found on the committee’s website. I never got a response.

What About Senators?

Well, I recently thought it necessary to contact one of the two Senators representing the state I live in. My experience was similar to those Members of the House.

Friday, June 28, 2013

The Legacy Of President Obama

Shock & Awe

One can only sincerely hope that by now the American people are shocked enough not to vote for another business and free market enemy like the current President in a generation (next 30 years).

The Statue Of Liberty Is Inconsolably Weeping

One can only hope the world took notice what happened in the so called freest country on earth. Democracy and a constitution is by far no guarantee for individual freedom and limited small government no matter how many Statues of Liberty grace a country’s harbors.

Reincarnation Of FDR Or The Anti Reagan

I think this sums up this President very well!

Thursday, June 27, 2013

Marriage Is A Truly Private Affair

What’s Next?

Now that marriage between same sex partners is all but sanctioned by government, we wonder what comes next?
Will we soon see the legalization of polygamy (polygyny or polyandry)? Will humans marry animals? Other suggestions?
What would be wrong with this?

Keep Government Out Of This As Much As Possible

Why is government so much involved in marriage anyway? To protect the institution? From a nationalistic perspective: To insure population growth and social stability?

The only legitimate role I can see for government as far as marriage is concerned is to record a special relationship between two perhaps more human beings. E.g. any preferential tax treatment for how people live together or not should be abolished. No personal relationship between humans should be given any preferential treatment by government.

Someone might interject: What about the children? Self evidently, Children deserve some kind of protection by the government, but this does not require the government condoning certain human relationships or not. The welfare of children can be addressed by the government without any recourse to the underlying relationship of humans.

A Truly Private Affair

It should be left to exclusively to the individual to decide with whom the individual wants to spend his/her life together in a hopeful a meaningful relationship.

It is up to the individuals involved that should be able to decide for themselves whether to register their relationship at all with the government or not.

It should be up to the individuals involved to decide whether or how they get married (civil or church etc.)?

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

The Most Obstinate Anti-Business President Of Recent Times – Barack Obama

The American Voters Were Fools

Why was this guy reelected in 2012? Were the American voters fools? Yes, they were!
I am so glad, the American people were smart enough to insert a term limit for presidents into the US Constitution in 1951. Another term with this guy would be a disaster.

Public Business Enemy No. 1

Now President Obama wants to use his executive power to further strangle the already sluggish economy with his environmental obsessions.

Wall Street Journal On The Issue

This newspaper expressed it much better than I could in their opinion piece titled “The Carbonated President/Obama unveils a war on fossil fuels he never disclosed as a candidate.” on 6/26/2013. Here are some salient excerpts (Emphasis added):
1.       “President Obama's climate speech on Tuesday was grandiose even for him, but its surreal nature was its particular hallmark.” [Is he delusional?]
2.       “But there was the President in tony Georgetown, threatening more energy taxes and mandates that will ensure fewer jobs, still lower incomes and slower growth.” [How many unemployed or welfare recipients voted for this guy?]
3.       “Mr. Obama's "climate action plan" adds up to one of the most extensive reorganizations of the U.S. economy since the 1930s, imposed through administrative fiat and raw executive power.” [Who does he think he is?]
4.       “He wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 17% by 2020, but over his 6,500-word address …” [A central planner in chief]
5.       “Most striking about this Obama legacy project is its [his] contempt for democratic consent. Congress has consistently rejected an Obama-style "comprehensive" anticarbon energy plan.” [Authoritarian and disturbing!]
6.       “The only legislative justification for Mr. Obama's new plan is an abusive interpretation of the Clean Air Act, which was last revised in 1990 and never mentions carbon as a pollutant.” [To classify carbon dioxide as a pollutant or toxin is perverse and extreme.]

7.       “Instead [before the last election] he posed as the John the Baptist of fossil fuels in locales such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia—taking credit for the shale fracking boom he had nothing to do with and running ads attacking Mitt Romney as anticoal.” [President Obama is a pure opportunist.]

European Union Central Planners And The Automotive Industry

Tougher Average Fleet Fuel Regulations In Europe

Today (6/26/2013), I read that the European Union are discussing more stringent average fleet fuel efficiency regulations for automobiles (See e.g. here, here). For brevity sake, I will not go into any details of the new regulations.

Like the CAFE regulations in USA since 1975, the European Union is acting like a central planner to resolve a non issue. Any environmental justification is most likely a red herring.

Unconstitutional Expropriation

Such regulations are akin to the government resorting to eminent domain. Property rights of automobile manufacturers are trampled.

Government Industrial Policies

This is a massive government intervention into the workings of the free market. Government undertakes to structure an entire industry and to interfere with business decisions.

Such massive regulations are a considerable constraint on innovation.

Government Mandated Rationing

Don’t be fooled! That is what it is! Consumer will needlessly and invariably have to pay more for future vehicles. Consumers will have less of a choice.
Non-Tariff Trade Protectionism

Average fleet fuel efficiency regulations are nothing but measures of non-tariff trade protectionism. I hope, the developing countries or other OECD countries will finally wake up and fight these regulations.

These regulations are designed to substitute foreign imports of vehicles to domestic production of vehicles. If I was the owner/principal of an Indian car company I would sue the European Union and the US.

Proposal For A Solution

Why does government not limit itself to funding basic research into e.g. bacteria that can split carbon dioxide into oxygen and stay out of the way to meddle with businesses and consumers?

Monday, June 24, 2013

Dismal Economists Or How Technology Is Destroying Jobs

Technological Change Becomes A Scapegoat

I have recently written a blog post about modern luddites arguing about the dangers of robots and how they will displace labor. Every age has their luddites.

Technological Change Destroys Jobs Faster Than It Creates New Ones

This about sums up a new “feature story” in the MIT Technology Review titled “How Technology Is Destroying Jobs” written by its editor David Rotman dated 6/12/2013. The MIT Technology Review was the last publication I would have expected such an article to come from.

In the opening paragraph we read (Emphasis added):
“… it is easy to miss just how provocative Erik Brynjolfsson’s contention really is. ­Brynjolfsson, a professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, and his collaborator and coauthor Andrew McAfee have been arguing for the last year and a half that impressive advances in computer technology—from improved industrial robotics to automated translation services—are largely behind the sluggish employment growth of the last 10 to 15 years. Even more ominous for workers, the MIT academics foresee dismal prospects for many types of jobs as these powerful new technologies are increasingly adopted not only in manufacturing, clerical, and retail work but in professions such as law, financial services, education, and medicine. … But Brynjolfsson and McAfee’s claim is more troubling and controversial. They believe that rapid technological change has been destroying jobs faster than it is creating them, contributing to the stagnation of median income and the growth of inequality in the United States.”

These two authors, Mr. B. and Mr. McAfee, have also published a book about this subject in 2011 titled “Race Against the Machine”. In their online excerpt the authors state “We can’t win that race, especially as computers continue to become more powerful and capable.” Oh, really!

Just Academic Baloney

To blame the “rapid technological advances” for the sluggish employment growth over the last 10 years or so is a seriously flawed economic analysis. If anything is the cause the economic malaise of the past 10 years are failed economic policies, excessive government spending over the past 2-3 decades, excessive government debt, high burden of taxation and regulation, and reckless central bank manipulation of interest rates and other monetary policy failures.

Economics is not a dismal science, but some economists are dismal and some are Luddites and dismal combined in one person.

Like the steam engine or the spinning jenny or industrial robots before, this technological revolution will not lead to employment disaster. Who builds robots? Who repairs robots? Who writes software, who designs networks, data centers, etc.? I am still waiting for a robot to cut my hair (I wish they would be available).

Sunday, June 23, 2013

Tesla Owner Takes On Car Dealer Ships

Update As Of 7/18/2014

The Cato Institute just published a paper titled “Tesla and The  Car dealers’ lobby” with more background on the government protected car dealerships.

Tesla Is A Contradiction In Terms

Recently, the Wall Street Journal has described in detail that Tesla Motors primarily profits from government subsidies and selling government mandated zero emission credits. I blogged about this here.

A few days ago, the Wall Street Journal reported on 6/18/2013 titled “Tesla Clashes With Car Dealers/Electric-Vehicle Maker Wants to Sell Directly to Consumers; Critics Say Plan Violates Franchise Laws” (Subscription required) that the owner of Tesla Motors, i.e. Mr. Elon Musk, is having a hard time to sell electric cars directly to customers, because local car dealerships are a government protected racket.

The Government Car Dealership Racket

In another previous blog post I raised the issue why it is not possible in the US to buy cars over the Internet from anywhere in the world.

It is quite remarkable how in the so called freest country on earth it is possible that local businesses like car dealerships in collusion with state legislators have for decades suppressed competition through among other things franchise laws. Thus, it appears that US car manufacturers are not allowed to sell directly to customers, but only through franchised dealers.

To quote from the above mentioned article: “These franchise laws have insulated car dealers from much of the e-commerce revolution that has hammered other sectors from books to electronics.”


Now, Mr. Musk is up against a formidable opposition by car dealerships and state lawmakers (including Republicans) in different states where he is trying to sell online or via his own stores.

Kudos And Best Of Luck!

I wish Mr. Elon Musk best of luck and lot’s of success to crack wide open this incredible example of cronysm in the United States of America. Hope, Americans will wake up!

President Nixon Was Impeached For IRS Abuse

Source

In “A Brief History of IRS Political Targeting” author James Bovard tells story about four US Presidents who were actively using the IRS to go after their opponents. This article appeared on 5/15/2013 in the Wall Street Journal.

Following are quotes from this article regarding President Nixon:
“After Richard Nixon took office, his administration quickly created a Special Services Staff to mastermind what a memo called "all IRS activities involving ideological, militant, subversive, radical, and similar type organizations." More than 10,000 individuals and groups were targeted because of their political activism or slant between 1969 and 1973, including Nobel Laureate Linus Pauling (a left-wing critic of the Vietnam War) and the far-right John Birch Society.
The IRS was also given Nixon's enemies list to, in the words of White House counsel John Dean, "use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies."”

Articles Of Impeachment

When you search for the articles of impeachment against President Richard Nixon on the Internet using Bing or Google you will not find any first rate, primary sources for this document (as of 6/23/13). E.g. there is no link to any law school, Library of Congress or US Congress webpage. One can argue Nixon’s impeachment happened long before the Internet, but I think, this is not quite convincing.

I visited the US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee website at http://judiciary.house.gov/. A site search for “nixon articles of impeachment” fails.

This is disturbing now that we are in the 40th year after Watergate and new abuses by the IRS have been discovered.

The 2nd Article Of Impeachment

Relying on a secondary source, following are the relevant parts of the 2nd Article of Impeachment:
“Article 2: Abuse of Power.
(1) He [President Nixon] has, acting personally and through his subordinated and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigation to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.”


What is surprising is that at least 10 members of the House Judiciary Committee voted against each of the three Articles of Impeachment.

Saturday, June 22, 2013

The Subatomic Particle Zoo Is More Like A Microcosmos

Posted: 6/22/2013 Updated: 2/20/2017, 2/26/2016, 11/27/2015, 9/9/2015, 7/14/2015, 9/28/2014

Update Of 2/20/2017

Just read Group introduces six new particles to standard model to solve five enduring problems. Four scientists propose a new model called SMASH for "Standard Model Axion See-saw Higgs portal inflation." The proposed particles are rho (to help explain inflation), the axion (to help explain dark matter) a color triplet fermion and three heavy right-handed neutrinos.

The zoo keeps expanding …

Update Of 2/26/2016

Just read Scientists discover new subatomic particle. “DZero is one of two experiments at Fermilab's Tevatron collider. Although the Tevatron was retired in 2011, the experiments continue to analyse billions of previously recorded events from its collisions. ... DZero scientists first saw hints in July 2015 of the new particle, called X(5568), named for its mass—5568 megaelectronvolts.
While all other observed tetraquarks contain at least two of the same flavor, X(5568) has four different flavors -  up, down, strange and bottom.”

Update Of 11/27/2015

Just read http://phys.org/news/2015-11-material-universe-yields-particle.html where “the the existence of a new type of particle called the type-II Weyl fermion” is predicted.

Update Of 9/9/2015

“Now two experiments have observed particles misbehaving in ways not predicted by any known laws of physics, potentially suggesting the existence of some new type of particle beyond the standard zoo. ”

Preface

This is a speculative blog post about physics.

The Ever Bigger Zoo


This week (6/17/2013 – 6/23/2013), a new particle, i.e. Zc(3900) was confirmed possibly consisting of four quarks instead of three. See e.g. here. What is particularly noteworthy about this latest announcement is that also a Chinese particle accelerator participated in this finding.

Quanta Magazine just published this long, recommendable article “Quark Quartet Fuels Quantum Feud Newly discovered particles have incited a fierce debate among experts about the correct picture of matter at the quantum scale.” about the quandaries in the subatomic particle zoo.

A String Of Theories

You may sense that a field of science is confused or clueless when the number of theories increases or theories become more convoluted and drift further away from simple principles.

In my estimation, this is the current status of subatomic particle physics.

We had Quarks, String Theory, Superstring Theories, quantum chromodynamics, The Standard Model etc... Charming as these theories may be, they do not inspire confidence.

Then there is Dark Matter and Dark Energy …

Macrocosmos Mirrored In A Microcosmos Or Vice Versa

The Universe (macrocosmos) contains zillions of galaxies and stars etc. Is it possible that the subatomic particles are part of a microcosmos? If so, perhaps subatomic particles themselves do not really matter. Maybe it is just abstract principles to explain both cosmos. Energy is perhaps the clue or glue.

God must be smiling perhaps more enigmatic than Mona Lisa (ouch, this is anthropomorphism)!

Waiting For Einstein

I am afraid we have to wait for the next Einstein (perhaps a woman, perhaps an Indian or Chinese or Israeli) to come up with a convincing theory to explain the subatomic particle zoo.

Friday, June 21, 2013

Who Wants To Be The Next Victim Of A Terrorist Attack?

Limited Government - Not Big Brother

Having grown up in Germany in the immediate post World War II period I sure do not like any totalitarian states or any comprehensive government surveillance of its citizens. My blog post is my creed!

Abstract Principles Do Not Trump
The Killing Of Humans By Fanatics

Does anyone of those individuals who feverishly hail Mr. Edward Snowden as some kind of a hero want to be the next victim of a mindless, future terrorist attack? Those individuals count on the low probability that they themselves will be the next victim. This is an egoistic and inhumane attitude. Nobody deserves to die because of a fanatic.

We know at least since Voltaire that you cannot argue with a fanatic. This is perhaps a harsh observation. It may not apply to every fanatic, but it is generally not very far off from the truth. However, terrorists who intend to kill or kill themselves to kill as many other innocent humans as possible are fanatics.

Self-Defense Against Homicidal Fanatics Is
An Utmost Basic Government Function

These fanatics would probably not hesitate to use the deadliest weapons they can possibly get hold off. How about some kind of a very contagious and deadly disease created by a terrorist at his home using off the shelf equipment? Therefore, it is a primary, genuine duty of a democratically elected government to protect its citizens from such fanatics. The ultimate responsibility of each citizen and our elected representatives is to make sure that sufficient safeguards are put in place.

Non-Violence Principle

This fundamental principle of civilized society cannot be repeated enough:
1.       Violence is only to be used as a self-defense against attacks on your person or your family to prevent imminent harm

2.       If you have grievances against government or any other institution etc. you have to resort to non-violent means first and be patient for a long time.

Thursday, June 20, 2013

New German Word Describes Succinctly President Obama’s Legacy

Stumbled upon a German neologism today while reading a reader’s comment at my favorite online German newspaper.

The new German word is: Drohnenkrieger (drone warrior)

I am not sure whether this apologetic, appeasing, Nobel Peace Price winning US President who aims for Zero Nukes likes this characterization.

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Something About Mary Anning

Gender Studies An Academic Field?

This is a gender study of the different kind. Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex (1949) could use some revisiting. J

How Men Helped Women To Become Famous

For brevity sake, I will not go into any details of Ms. Mary Anning’s life and achievements. Please read e.g. Wikipedia about her or here.

Her father (and probably mother) send her to a Congregationalist School. I am not an expert on Congregionalism, but it appears that this church put great emphasis on local churches; freedoms of the laity etc. Thus, young Mary enjoyed a special education thanks to the men (and women) involved.

It was none less than her father, who got Mary interested and taught her in geology and trading of fossils. Had he not perhaps Mary would have taken a different path.

It was one of Mary’s male customers, a wealthy collector, who became disturbed by the Anning’s family's poverty. So he auctioned off her fossils. He wrote to a paleontologist that the sale was "for the benefit of the poor woman and her son and daughter at Lyme, who have in truth found almost all the fine things which have been submitted to scientific investigation ... I may never again possess what I am about to part with, yet in doing it I shall have the satisfaction of knowing that the money will be well applied." The auction raised £400 (a huge sum in today’s value). This male collector gave Ann all the credit and saved her from financial troubles.

In contrast to the finding of the plesiosaur skeletons a few years earlier, for which she supposedly was not credited, when Buckland presented his findings on coprolites to the Geological Society, he mentioned Anning by name and praised her skill and industry in helping to solve the mystery.


I would venture to guess, there are more examples like those above. Thus, a lady who was not a member of any academic faculty of her time and did not have an adequate education she had quite a bit of influence in the so called male dominated world of her time. Her extraordinary talents and achievements were recognized by males presumably more than was usual in those days. Ideally, Mary should have received the full credit for her discoveries … However, there are numerous men in history whose contributions were let’s say overlooked.

Have You Ever Seen A Cyclope?

A blog post on the lighter side of life.

Maybe you remember the one eyed giant Cyclope from Greek Mythology, e.g. Homer’s Odyssey?

Well, thanks to a recent picture on Bing.com I discovered the Silky Ateater, the only living species of the genus Cyclopes. It is a very cute, small animal. Nothing to be afraid of.

Americans Are Driving Stagecoaches Not Cars

This a hyperbolic blog post!

Fine German Cars

For example, many of those Americans who drive these expensive BMWs, Mercedes, Audis, or Porsches drive their cars like it was a stagecoach. To me it is amusing to see and to leave them far behind with my cheap, underpowered Honda Civic.

Speed Limits Are An Unconstitutional Insult

I have previously written more in depth about the unconstitutionality of speed limits here.

Take a commuter for example who knows every yard of the itinerary to and from work by heart. This commuter still has to obey sometimes ridiculous speed limits along the way.

The Founders of this Great Country would be ashamed!

A Perversion Of The Rule Of Law

Speed limits are a big government power grab; an insult to freedom loving responsible drivers; and a government mandated obscene enforcement of conformity.

Monday, June 17, 2013

John F Kennedy And IRS Abuse

Source

In “A Brief History of IRS Political Targeting” author James Bovard tells story about four US Presidents who were actively using the IRS to go after their opponents. This article appeared on 5/15/2013 in the Wall Street Journal.

The Discordant Voices Of Extremism

These words were used by JFK in a speech on 11/18/1961. “Shortly thereafter, JFK signaled at a news conference that he expected the IRS to be vigilant in policing the tax-exempt status of questionable (read: conservative) organizations.

Within a few days of Kennedy's remarks, the IRS launched the Ideological Organizations Audit Project. It targeted right-leaning groups, including the Christian Anti-Communist Crusade, the American Enterprise Institute and the Foundation for Economic Education. Kennedy also used the IRS to strong-arm companies into complying with "voluntary" price controls. Steel executives who defied the administration were singled out for audits.

A 1976 report by the Senate Select Committee on Government Intelligence on the Kennedy program noted: "By directing tax audits at individuals and groups solely because of their political beliefs, the Ideological Organizations Audit Project established a precedent for a far more elaborate program of targeting 'dissidents.'"”

“d. IRS Investigations of Political Organizations  

The lES program that came to be used against the domestic dissi-  dents of the 1960s was first used against Communists in the 1950s.  As part of its COINTELPRO against the Communist Party, the  FBI arranged for IRS investigations of Pai'ty members, and ob-  tained their tax returns.^^° In its efforts against the Connnunist Party,  the FBI had unlimited access to tax returns : it never told the IRS why  it wanted them, and IRS never attempted to find out.^^^   In 1961, responding to White House and congressional interest in  right-wing organizations, the IRS began comprehensive investiga-  tions of right-wing groups to identify contributors and ascertain  whether or not some of them were entitled to their tax exempt status.^^^  Left-wing groups were later added, in an effort to avoid charges that  such IRS activities were all aimed at one part of the political spectrum.  Both right- and left-wing groups were selected for review and investi-  gation because of their political activity and not because of any infor-  mation that they had violated the tax laws.^^^   While the IRS efforts begun in 1961 to investigate the political  activities of tax exempt organizations were not as extensive as later   ""Memorandum from J. Edgar Hoover to R. F. Kennedy, 11/20/63. (John F.  Kennedy Library.)   ^" Memorandum from Attorney General Kennedy to the President, 4/12/62 en-  closing memorandum from Director. FBI, to the Attorney General, 4/12/62 ;  testimony of Courtney Evans, former Assistant Director, FBI, 12/l/7r>, p. .39.   "" Letter from Attorney General McGrath to President Truman, 12/7/49 ; letter  from J. Edgar Hoover to Maj. Gen. Harry H. Vaughn, Military Aide to the Presi-  dent, 1/14/50.   ^™ Memorandum from J. Edgar Hoover to Attorney General William P. Rogers,  5/2.5/60.   '** Memorandum from A. H. Belmont to L. V. Boardman, 8/28/56, p. 4.   '"^ Leon Green testimony, 9/12/75, pp. 6-8.   ^*'' Memorandum, William Loeb, Assistant Commissioner, Compliance to Dem.  J. Barron, Director of Audit, 11/30/61.   ^^ Memorandum, Attorney Assistant to Commis.sion to Director, IRS Audit  Division, 4/2/62.     54   programs in 1969-1973, they were a significant departure by the IRS  from normal enforcement criteria for investigating persons or groups  on the basis of information indicating noncompliance. By directing  tax audits at individuals and groups solely because of their political  beliefs, the Ideological Organizations Audit Project (as the 1961 pro-  gram was known )^^* established a precedent for a far more elaborate  program of targeting "dissidents." ^^^”

Saturday, June 15, 2013

What Is On Your Mind?

Mind transcends nature!
Human computer network interface
The mind is a terrible thing to waste! (1972)
Mind over matter (1863)
Enlightenment, Age of Reason (1650)
Faith can move mountains (Bible, Matthew 17)
Mind moves mass [Lat. Mens agitat molem] (ca. 19 BC)
God created minds!

Hysteric German Opposition To Google Street View

Long Overdue

This is a blog post I had intended to write some time ago, but did not find time to write it or this subject had drifted away.

Google Stopped Taking Pictures In Germany

“In April 2011, Google decided to stop taking Street View images in Germany” (Wikipedia). Germans can be very parochial and myopic.

What Germans don’t see are the enormous benefits of this project. Just the thought of being able to wander through the most famous streets, places etc. of the world at any time from my computer at home or even from my smartphone is mind boggling.

I believe, most of the concerns raised against Google Street View can be easily ameliorated by current and available software technology, e.g. automatically graying out faces, license plates etc. Are Luddites only a past phenomenon?

Personal Experience

Not long ago I wanted to identify the multi-dwelling house in which my maternal Grandmother lived in the city of Frankfurt am Main. I had some faint memory of what it looked like and where it was located.


Since I live in the USA I would have to travel to Germany to physically walk through the street to refresh my memory. Thus I thought, I use Google Streetview from the comfort of my home in the US and view the pictures of this short and narrow street not far from downtown. However, as I was viewing the images of the multi-story buildings lining this rather typical residential neighborhood, I noticed that a large number of dwellings were not visible due to redaction. Thus, my effort was practically thwarted by the residents of this street. Thank you very much!

Samantha Power Is Unfit For The Office Of UN Ambassador

Team Obama

I hope her confirmation in the US Senate will fail. It is amazing that after Ms. Rice, the US President has the audacity to name this lady for this office. It is highly irresponsible for the President of the USA to appoint such a person to the UN.

Is One Magazine Article Enough?

Is it possible to make a judgment on a person by just reading one of her many writings? If this article is a representative distillation of her thinking, then perhaps the answer is yes.

The Wall Street Journal published excerpts of her March 2003 New Republic article in the Notable & Quotable (Subscribers only) section on 6/6/2013. Unfortunately, these few quotes give only an incomplete picture.

The New Republic article by Samantha Power is titled “Force Full” and was published on 3/3/2003. This article is full of questionable statements.

Here are some salient excerpts and comments (Emphasis added):
1.       Liberals resisted black-and-white characterizations, sought nuance and understanding, and dithered. They were also torn by the dual impulses of protecting human rights on the one hand and restraining U.S. hegemony on the other.”
[US hegemony is that what she will be torn apart about at the UN?]
2.       “Now that Bill Clinton's invisible hand has been replaced by George W. Bush's iron fist, however …”
[Where does she get this nonsense from? To relate Adam Smith’s invisible hand with womanizer Bill Clinton is quite desperate not to mention this iron fist comparison.]
3.       “FOREIGN POLICY IS an explicitly amoral enterprise.”
[What a childish mindset produces such generalized statements? Does she think she is witty?]
4.       “… that the long-standing dichotomy between American moral values and American strategic and economic interests was both false and unsustainable. The world and the United States were more dangerous places if tyrants flourished, AIDS went untreated, and corporations exported human rights abuses that were outlawed at home. There would be blowback.”
[Samantha Power is disqualified. Period!]
5.       “For the first time in 50 years, they [our European NATO partners] saw that linking their fates to ours rendered them more, not less, vulnerable to attack. … The French, we noted, often seemed unable to distinguish the Republican Party from the Baath Party.”
[So US foreign policy under Bush [Jr.] jeopardized our European friends? Is it not that the Western Europeans were sheltered for decades under the US military umbrella so they could become military impotent and save a lot of money? Is it not the European guilt over two World Wars and Colonialism that has extremely pacified European foreign policy and reduced it to diplomacy only without a stick?]
6.       “And international institutions certainly could not restrain American will.”
[Why would anyone send this lady to the UN? Will she restrain the US and for what reasons?]
7.       “The United States will act unilaterally when it can, multilaterally when it must--on issues like trade, nonproliferation, and law enforcement. With the unsigning of the Rome Treaty on the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty-- … refusal to pay its U.N. dues … rejection of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the land mines ban, and other international treaties--the United States came to be seen less as it sees itself (the cop protecting the world from rogue nations) than as the very runaway state international law needs to contain.”
[Samantha Power is comparing the USA to a rogue state like North Korea or Iran. Incredible!]
8.       “We can promise $15 billion for AIDS prevention and treatment and blot from memory American threats to impose sanctions on countries that produce generic AIDS drugs. We can go to war against the Taliban, never acknowledging our previous aid to the regime--we offered a grant of $43 million as late as May 2001--for its help quashing opium production. And it goes without saying that the CIA-assisted coups in Guatemala, Chile, and the Congo; the bombing of Cambodia; and the support for right-wing terror squads in Latin America were simply dark chapters of a distant past. This White House [2003], the most secretive of the last century, has drastically cut back the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the ability of outsiders to explore and expose past policies.”
[Ms. Power has the sentimentality of a naïve Samaritan. She is biased to the extreme looking the other way not seeing the Soviet Union and the KGB or Cuba. Is it not an irony that the President she wants to work for is again a most secretive President?]
9.       “The United States will not subject itself to the jurisdiction of the ICC, so only it will decide whether it has violated the Geneva Conventions as it bombs Iraq. American officials are reportedly abusing Al Qaeda detainees or "rendering" them to countries where they will be tortured ("We don't kick the [expletive] out of them. We send them to other countries so they can kick the [expletive] out of them," one American official told The Washington Post).”
[Is Samantha Power a closet staff of Amnesty International or what? She willingly soaks up every word published in the Washington Post coming from an anonymous, official source.]
10.   “And, although the U.S.-led wars in Kosovo and Afghanistan improved life for the majority of citizens in each, the U.S. habit of hit-and-run left the fate of the people to the Europeans and to the warlords, …”
[Samantha Power appears to have a very limited understanding of foreign policy. Kosovo is in Europe. It was therefore the primary responsibility of the European Union to handle this situation. If the US would not engage in what she calls “hit and run”, but perhaps more sustained campaigns, I am sure Ms. Power would argue the same and accuse the US of gun boat diplomacy or similar.]
11.   “Many terrorists are indeed nihilistic, anti-modern, or threatened by liberal values. But they depend for their sustenance on mainstream anti-Americanism throughout the world. Some anti-Americanism derives simply from our being a colossus that bestrides the earth. This resentment may be incurable. But much anti- Americanism derives from the role U.S. political, economic, and military power has played in denying such freedoms to others.”
[Again where does Ms. Power’s get this nonsense from?]
12.   U.S. foreign policy has to be rethought. It needs not tweaking but overhauling. We need: a historical reckoning with crimes committed, sponsored, or permitted by the United States. This would entail restoring FOIA to its pre- Bush stature, … and acknowledging the force of a mantra we have spent the last decade promoting in Guatemala, South Africa, and Yugoslavia: … Instituting a doctrine of the mea culpa would enhance our credibility by showing that American decision-makers do not endorse the sins of their predecessors. When Willie Brandt went down on one knee in the Warsaw ghetto, his gesture was gratifying to World War II survivors, but it was also ennobling and cathartic for Germany. Would such an approach be futile for the United States?
[These statements are most incredible! Ms. Power is so disqualified. Period! First of all Willy Brandt was kneeling on both knees. Ms. Power, which US crime exactly compares to the Nazi attack on Poland or the genocide of Jews, dissidents, homosexuals and so on? This is just absurd!]
13.   [This article is too long to go on quoting from it. So I basically stop here!]
14.   “Embedding U.S. power in an international system and demonstrating humility would be painful, unnatural steps for any empire, never mind the most potent empire in the history of mankind. But more pain now will mean far less pain later.”
[This paragraph concludes her article!


A Call To All US Senators

It is your obligation and duty to deny the confirmation of Ms. Samantha Power.

Personal Life


By the way, she is the wife of the 16 year her senior Nudge professor Cass Sunstein. This is not an ad hominem attack, but a fact. This gentleman also played a prominent role in Obama’s presidency.