The aging of our Youth

I predicted this years ago but no one listens to me.  A new study out of South Korea proves that the use of digital devices by our youth (10-18) is causing early senile dementia.  Now if you are one who poo-poos a study from South Korea, understand that SK has the largest per capita usega and ownership of digital devices in the world.  Concern over potential harm from these devices prompted the study, and the results are anything but comforting.

My first question would be; how did we let this happen?  The pursuit of instant gratification and immediate results created the boom in digital devices, the law of unintended consequences obviously not taken into account.  The ability to instantly connect with anyone, anywhere at any time may indeed be a timesaver and make life (in the broadest sense) easier, but is that efficiency worth it when our kids will now become like us, but at a much earlier age?

Will it now be the concern of parents that their kids might be aging much faster than they are, or will this study pass well below the radar and have no effect on the how and what of digital device usage?  With these devices pretty much taking over our lives, it is foolish to think there will be any restrictions or back-tracking on what parents allow their kids to do with their hand-held senility boxes.  Abdication of parental responsibility is rampant today, and if parents would rather have their school teach sex education (including gay and abnormal sexuality) then they will easily allow the school to encourage an activity among kids that now is shown to cause rapid aging.

I remember a time, here in Eugene when the 4J school board decided to allow soft drink machines on all campuses, believing that they could generate income to pay for the schools.  It was pointed out to them the dangers of the consumption of large amounts of refined sugar by growing bodies citing studies on obesity and addiction.  No on listened and the machines went in.  About 9 years later they machines were pulled out, the reason being that there was an increase in the size of students, diabetes seemed to be rising and the most important one; awareness of the school board that they were about to have a serious PR problem.

We have another chance to save our kids from our own stupidity.  Will we rise to the challenge or will we, once again abdicate our responsibility to the next generation for the sake of the “ideal of the day”?

You can read about the study http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/southkorea/10138403/Surge-in-digital-dementia.html, http://fox4kc.com/2013/06/28/digital-dementia-surging-among-young-electronics-users/,  http://www.amazon.co.uk/Demencia-Digital-Manfred-Spitzer/dp/8466653090

Save the children, take away their devices.  Do it for the good of humanity!

See you on the other side…

Boston Jihad; two bombs kill three, injure dozens at marathon

One of many victims being wheeled to emergency care

Is this a jihad attack?  As of this moment it is not clear. There are other possibilities; right-wing Christian radicals, Neo-Nazis, anti-tax protesters, radical environmentalists, anarchists, the list is long.   We do not know enough yet to do more than speculate as to the who and why, but certain things are clear. The bombs were placed with maximum damage in mind, under the watchful eye of massive law enforcement and the general public.  Shrapnel caused much damage, and the explosives were most likely homemade with common chemicals and probably detonated by cellphone or a crude internal timer.  There are credible reports of a suspect in custody; aSaudi national, age 20 who was tackled by a bystander after exhibiting what was described as suspicious behavior.

Now lets not jump to any conclusions, the man in question is reported to be cooperating with authorities and has denied any involvement in the bombing.  Innocent until proven guilty, remember? There are some things about this attack which do point to it being jihad, the most telling at the moment is that there were two explosions within 30 seconds of each other.  Twin blasts are a hallmark of both Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, the purpose is that the first bomb brings the emergency workers and bystanders out to help, then the second goes off, killing and maiming many more than the first bomb did.  This still could be a copycat IED, the details are still coming in but as of now it appears that it could be a jihad attack.

The suspect in custody reportedly has suffered burns, which begs the question; was he an innocent bystander caught close to the blast, or was he one of the jihadists who was too close when his bomb went off?  Again, time will give us the answers so we can only use what information is at hand and draw incomplete conclusions from them.  One thing is certain, there are those in the Islamic world who rejoice at our suffering, and with this attack, and subsequent deaths the jihadists are starting to come out of the woodwork and shout their glee at our suffering.  Expect more dancing in the Islamic streets in the next few days.

How do we react to this?  What can be said to comfort the victims and assuage their fear?  What we don’t do is rampage with pitchforks and torches, looking under every rock for the boogyman.  Some will take this as a call to action, I implore those people to not be rash and step back to assess the situation critically.  Until we know all the details the only responsibility we have is to pray for comfort for the victims and their families.

I knew this day would come, but I prayed it never would.  I hope against hope that this attack is something other than jihad, I fear it is just that, and with this barrage the battle with Islamic hegemony is again on the boil.

May God bless us all in this time of crisis.

See many more pictures here.

 

Hey buddy, got change for a Muscovy?

We are rapidly approaching a time where the economy as we know it will cease to exist, and a new system will have to be invented.  If we use the model from pre-1913 and go back to a local currency and a barter/exchange system, we can regain control over our destiny and the future of our community.  Below is a piece for EP class on the need for local money and a call to change how we do business.

Enjoy.

Can we Afford a Truly Local Economy?

 

After reading “Community Money – The Potential of Local Currency”  Z Magazine – July/August 1995 by Susan Meeker-Lowry I was transported back to L.A. in the early 80s where I, along with my father and his beauty/barber business joined a local barter group called “Barter Exchange” or BX for short and it was based in exactly what is going on today;  using barter as money instead of the coin of the realm.  I don’t remember why we stopped using it, I would have to guess that there were not enough people involved or maybe the fees were too high, but we drifted away and as far as I know they (BX) do not exist anymore.  I do remember thinking what a great idea it was and how one could get many things without worrying about the cash to pay for them.  Today it seems the concept of a barter economy is stronger than ever, and there are many groups not just in the US but around the world, assembling the locals and creating a method of trade that is based in actual worth, not ego-driven perceived value.

The idea of barter/local currency has many supporters world-wide and for good reason.  Besides the obvious negatives of federal/government money which, at the very least is fake, ie fiat money that is backed by nothing more than our belief in its value there is the question of who holds it.  When money was backed by real assets like precious metals/minerals it had an intrinsic worth, today with no backing except wishes, there are three problems with fiat money; “…there is never enough of it, it is misallocated at its source so that it goes to those who already have lots of it, and it systematically pumps wealth from the poor to the rich.”  What is needed is a way to exchange goods and services based in local needs.  We have that today but not everywhere, and many people are so deeply invested in the current financial system that they are too afraid, thinking they will lose what they have, to see the benefits of a local currency and a local barter system.

Prior to 1913, the value of money was based in anything seen as having value and local economies thrived using barter and local currency.  The Federal Reserve Act in 1913 destroyed most local exchange systems and forced everyone to use the mandated “Federal Reserve Note” as the basic means of paying for debts.  As our economy is now at the mercy of national and global financial forces, it is time to get back to taking care of each other by truly keeping it local.  There are many examples of local money; wooden money in Tenino, WA; cardboard money issued in Raymond, WA with a picture of a big oyster on the back; and corn-backed money in Clear Lake, IA. Scrip was even issued by Vassar seniors that consisted of pea green, blue, and yellow cards. Scrips were used to pay teachers in Wildwood, NJ; to make the payroll in Philadelphia and numerous other cities and towns across the country…” and this is just the beginning.  Barter is rampant in small and large towns across America; Camas WA, Fayetteville TN, Glendale AZ, Hope RI, Boise ID, Big Arm MT, San Diego CA, Austin TX and many, many others.  By combining a local currency and a barter/exchange system any town or, in a big city a neighborhood could become self-sufficient in what they provide and how it is moved between maker and user.  The benefits far outweigh being stuck in the vicious cycle of boom and bust inherit in our current profit-driven society, and will greatly level the field for all of us.

Lets all start using local barter/exchange groups instead of paying cash for our needs, and create our own money.  I propose we call our basic monetary unit the “Quack.”  Ten quacks is a Mallard, 25 quacks is a Muscovy, 50 quacks makes a Canvasback and 100 quacks makes a “Duck.”  I would love to buy something and pay using a Muscovy, two Mallards and a quack.  The marketing writes itself, doncha think?

 

Sources;

http://www.gigafree.com/barter.html

http://www.barterexchangedirectory.com/

http://globalbarterexchange.com/

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-11-12/local/35505384_1_baltimore-green-currency-association-bnotes-complementary-currency

Too may people, too little time

This is the world by 2050

This term I took another honors class, Environmental Politics with Stan Taylor, a class I would not have chosen willingly.  My preconceived notions were not disappointed fully, there was enough information presented to pique my interest and I have been given enough new information to get me to think critically and change my opinions and some beliefs I had previously held dear.  I won’t go into all the aspects learned but one; continued population growth and the impact on our future.  Many have written over the years about the potential for overpopulation creating global havoc, this short essay is not meant to distract from those works, but as a current addition to what has been postulated so far.

Continued global growth, as set up today is impossible to sustain.  The pace of population growth annually (1.5%) means we will have up to 10.5B humans on the earth, and at that number each of us will have, as our piece of the earth approximately one square inch.  What that means is, if you take every person and divide by the total amount of land, we all get a square inch of dirt.  That is not enough to sustain us, let alone provide for our basic food and shelter needs.  We talk about growth as if it was a good thing, yet numbers don’t lie.  We are taking no action today to come up with any kind of plan to stem the tide of humanity, and for good reason; no one wants to address the unpleasant facts regarding population control.

How do you reign in the population, who decides and how it is to be implemented are the core questions one must have answers to in order to begin the process.  I know some of you are beginning to think that I may advocate for some type of genocide or “cleansing” to solve the problem so let me be clear now; I do not call for mass killings.  I do believe that mass sterilizations will be required, or at the very least forced birth control.  We are at the point where we cannot allow unregulated breeding to continue.  Unless there is a sudden and mass change in thinking among the worlds peoples where a decision is made to voluntarily restrict births, laws and regulations will probably have to be put in place.

A bad example of forced birth restrictions is the policy in China where families can have, by law only one child.  It has reduced the birthrate but also created the cult of female infanticide.  Hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of female Chinese babies have been killed, and not just because they were child #2.  A large number of times their deaths were due to cultural norms which dictate that males have more chances, are better providers and the stronger of the species than females.  This unfortunate side effect does not take away from the results of the governments plan to reduce the birthrate; that has been accomplished.  It does speak to the problems that will be encountered if/when governments across the earth try to apply similar laws and restrictions.  Many societies and cultures see their males as more important than females in many ways, and they will make sure their males survive despite someone telling them otherwise.

It is the poorer cultures that will suffer, as they know little of the outside world except what they hear from tourists or a villager who left and returned with news and information of the greater world.  Their way of life, experienced on a millenial level will fundamentally change, or disappear altogether as the earth reacts to the mass of people trying to survive on less and less vital ingredients.  It would be unfair to burden just a small part of humankind with the majority of birth control, everyone will have to participate and in that we all share the dangers of letting too many people into the party.

If all this sounds like paranoid doom and gloom, you may be right.  However if you are wrong, then what?  All signs point to a looming showdown between growth and survival, and if we continue to ignore the signs we will wake up one morning and ask how this could have happened.  We will be shocked this could have occurred, and we will demand something be done.  It will be too late by then and whatever we do will not be enough, if it has any impact at all.  I understand this is a concept most will find alien and so much fantasy, but I encourage you to do your own research and see for yourself what the numbers add up to.  Decide for yourself if what I am saying is true, and if it is what are you going to do?

We cannot continue to breed, we must put the brakes on global birthrates and we must accept that the earth can only care for a finite number of people.  If we do nothing, the earth will take care of the problem itself.  Natural disasters are natures way of clearing out the pool, and part of that cleansing is to kill off the offending organisms in order to allow for a new beginning.  We are not any greater than the animals, birds and insects and will become so much dust and bones when our time comes, and we will perish along with other life forms when space and food become scarce, whether we like it or not.  Shall we wait for our own annihilation or take control ourselves and choose to severely limit the birthrate?  The choice is ours but it is not a choice any of us wants to make. That will be our albatross if we choose to ignore what is right in front of us.

Does Islam persecute Christians and other non-Muslims?

Depending on where you read, the answer is as clear as mud.  News out of Egypt and other Muslim countries paint a less than rosy picture of the fate of Christians.  There has been killing, looting, destruction of churches, homes and businesses while Christians flee in droves for anywhere else to live.  What is causing this exodus of Christians and are the stories we hear about this terrible persecution true?

Decide for yourself.

Enjoy.

 

Are Christians being persecuted by Islam?

As a non-Muslim in a Muslim land, the “dhimmi”, or second-class citizen is restricted in many ways.  Behavior, manner of dress, worshipping, business and other regulations are all designed to make sure the dhimmi understands and knows their place while living among the people of the “religion of peace”.

The Pact of Umar, a peace accord between the caliph Umar and the Christians of Syria, Iraq, the land of Palestine, Persia and Egypt was the first definitive ruling on the status of non-Muslims in a Muslim land.  As Christians were the dominate group in the Middle East for decades after the death of Muhammad and in the foreign lands conquered by Muslims, it was important to lay the ground rules for the interaction between the Muslim and the kuffir.

It was the intention of the caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab to make it easy for non-Muslims to be identified, controlled and subjugated, thus the pact between Muslims and Christians.  Today, the Pact of Umar is the guidebook for how Muslims are to treat non-believers in every aspect.

The Pact is widely disputed by both Islamic and Western scholars, one main claim being that the pact was written and attributed to Umar up to two hundred years after his death, in the belief that it would legitimize what was seen as a forgery and to bolster its weight among Islamic scholars of the day.  However, it is Ibn Kathir, an Islamic exegist of the medieval era and one of the most recognized and respected narrator of hadiths who wrote that the Pact of Umar stipulated “conditions that ensured [the] continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace” of the People of the Book (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 9:29)  Kathir’s statement can only be proved false if the Pact itself can be proven false.  The disagreement over how factual and correct the Pact is continues but the point remains; virtually all main schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi and Hanbali) as well as Al-Azhar University in Cairo, seat of Sunni law uphold the Pact as right and correct.  Whether or not the Pact is a forgery, or written 200 years after Umar to bolster Islamic hegemony remains a moot point.  There is little strong evidence that the Pact is fake, the only evidence cited by modern scholars is the Omari Treaty, which appears to contradict the Pact.

The Omari treaty came about after Islam entered Jerusalem and around the same time the Pact of Umar was said to be issued.  Abu Ubaydah came as a spokesman for Khattab, asking all residents to accept Khattab as their new emir, or leader.  This Omari Treaty contained a clause directed at non-Muslims (specifically Christians) which says, in part;

“Their churches are not to be taken, nor are they to be destroyed, nor are they to be degraded or belittled, neither are their crosses or their money, and they are not to be forced to change their religion, nor is any one of them to be harmed.”  Sounds like it directly challenges the Pact and allows for Christians to live as equals to Muslims.  The reality is different if we read a little further on;

“No Jews are to live with them (Muslims) in Illyaa’ and it is required of the people of Illyaa’ to pay the Jizya, like the people of the cities. It is also required of them to remove the Romans from the land…”  The jizya is a tax on non-Muslims that pays for their protection, similar to extortion money by the Mafia that would protect your business from suffering an “accident.”  The admonition that required Christians to remove the Romans was a win-win for Islam; let Christians die in battle against the enemy of Islam instead of Muslim soldiers, proving their fealty to Islam.  The Omari Treaty did not specify the same kind of degradation of Christians that the Pact did, but the paying of the jizya is a very important aspect of the distinction Islam makes between the rightly guided Muslim and the infidel Christian.  If we look at the Qur’an and sura 9 verse 29 it specifically states that the jizya must be paid as protection, and that the payment must make the infidel feel humbled and subjugated “Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low”  The jizya is meant to degrade and humiliate non-Muslims and is a constant reminder that the life of the dhimmi is always at the whim and mercy of the Muslim.  Whether or not the Pact or the treaty are historically accurate today is the lesser point; Christians and Jews in Muslim countries are treated in a manner consistent with the Pact of Umar and not the Omari Treaty, and the Pact is held as strong and correct by a majority of Islamic scholars and institutions.  Until and unless Islam opens the gate of ijtihad (reform) the Pact of Umar will continue to be used as a persecution method for those who refuse to convert to Islam.

Below is the Omari Treaty from http://www.muslimwiki.com/mw/index.php/Umari_Treaty

 

In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Beneficent.

This is what the slave of Allah, Umar b.Al-Khattab, the Amir of the believers, has offered the people of Illyaa’^[1] of security granting them Amaan (protection) for their selves, their money, their churches, their children, their lowly and their innocent, and the remainder of their people.

Their churches are not to be taken, nor are they to be destroyed, nor are they to be degraded or belittled, neither are their crosses or their money, and they are not to be forced to change their religion, nor is any one of them to be harmed.

No Jews are to live with them in Illyaa’ and it is required of the people of Illyaa’ to pay the Jizya, like the people of the cities. It is also required of them to remove the Romans from the land; and whoever amongst the people of Illyaa’ that wishes to depart with their selves and their money with the Romans, leaving their trading goods and children behind, then their selves, their trading goods and their children are secure until they reach their destination.

Upon what is in this book is the word of Allah, the covenant of His Messenger, of the Khulafaa’ and of the believers if they (the people of Illyaa’) gave what was required of them of Jizya.

The witnesses upon this were Khalid b. Al-Walid, ‘Amr b. Al-‘Aas, ‘Abdul-Rahman b. ‘Awf and Mu’awiyah b. Abi Sufyan. Written and passed on the 15th year (after Hijrah).

 

Next is the Pact of Umar from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.html  My comments are interspersed where appropriate.

 

The Pact of Umar

We heard from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Ghanam [died 78/697] as follows: When Umar ibn al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him, accorded a peace to the Christians of Syria, we wrote to him as follows:

In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. This is a letter to the servant of God Umar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of such-and-such a city. When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct (aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:

We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks’ cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims.

Saudi Arabia is the best example of this aspect of the pact, as they do not allow new churches to be built, or old ones renovated. (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/03/destroy-all-the-churches-saudi-arabias-poor-treatment-of-christians/254650/)

We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.

Not the other way around, though.

We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.

We shall not teach the Qur’an to our children.

The Bible is illegal in 51 countries, the majority of them being Muslim.

We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.

Yet it is apostasy to convert from Islam to any other religion, on pain of death (http://www.persecution.org/2012/06/06/muslims-slaughter-convert-to-christianity-in-tunisia/)

We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.

We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.

We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.

No way for the dhimmi to protect themselves or their families, making it easier for Muslims to abuse the dhimmi.

We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.

We shall not sell fermented drinks.

No alcohol. If it is banned by Islam it is forbidden to all.

We shall clip the fronts of our heads.

The dhimmi must have short hair.

We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists.

All non-Muslims must wear a belt and wear the same style clothes.  These are Identifying marks like the Nazi yellow star.

We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.

Keep a low profile and you might survive another day.

We shall not take slaves who have been allotted to Muslims.

We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.

Nothing taller than a Muslim home or mosque.

(When I brought the letter to Umar, may God be pleased with him, he added, “We shall not strike a Muslim.”)

We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.

If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.

Umar ibn al-Khittab replied: Sign what they ask, but add two clauses and impose them in addition to those which they have undertaken. They are: “They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims,” and “Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact.”

from Al-Turtushi, Siraj al-Muluk, pp. 229-230.

Clearly the Pact of Umar is intended to subjugate non-Muslims, but if it is a false document how do modern scholars both Muslim and non-Muslim reconcile the fact that the rules in the Pact are being used today to enslave or murder Christians in Islamic lands?  In Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Tunisia one can see how the Pact is being implemented, with Coptic Christians being systematically slaughtered in the name of Allah, churches burned down and Christian homes destroyed while the people are driven off their lands.  January of this year the Telegraph published another article on the plight, and flight of tens of thousands of Copts out of Egypt due to the rapidly Islamization of the land of the Pharaohs.  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/9798777/Egypts-Coptic-Christians-fleeing-country-after-Islamist-takeover.html  Syrian Christians are fleeing in droves into Russia (http://www.copticworld.org/articles/1758/) but not exclusively because of the war between the FSA and Assad.  As bad as Assad is he did not persecute Christians (as a rule) because they were Christian, but the rebels, including the Al Nour group are reported to be enforcing parts of the Pact by threatening to, or actually slaughtering any non-Muslim they find.  Libya as well is experiencing a rise in Islamic violence against Christians (http://www.ibtimes.com/libyas-christians-face-rise-deadly-extremism-984492) although Libya has a broader history of living together with other religions in harmony than do other North African nations (at least so far).  However the rise in Islamic fundamentalism after the “Arab Spring” is showing itself to be less than tolerant of anything non-Islamic.

Western societies are coming under the influence of the Pact also; witness Dearborn, Michigan where for the past three years Christians have attended the annual Dearborn Arab Street Fair, only to be arrested and their rights to free speech and free assembly taken away, all because they were seen as “instigators” of friction between Muslims at the fair and Christians because they dared to talk about the Bible and Jesus to Muslims.  See this video from Answering Muslims and understand that the police chief of Dearborn is a Muslim, as is the majority of the city council (http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2010/06/arrested-for-being-christian-preachers.html)

There is a growing trend within Western countries that have close to 5% Muslim population where Muslims are demanding more rights under sharia, more Islamic control and less infidel presence.  Slowly the words of caliph Umar are insinuating themselves within Western culture, creating more conflict, friction and uneasiness.  As the Muslim population grows, so will the demand for more concessions to Muslim sensibilities.  As Islam makes more inroads the call for change into a more Muslim-tolerant society will get louder and more strident.  It has already happened in England, there are now areas that are “sharia-compliant” and signs warning people of what is not tolerated (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2019547/Anjem-Choudary-Islamic-extremists-set-Sharia-law-zones-UK-cities.html) Since the government has not shown a strong hand in quashing this act of revolution, there is every reason to believe that there is a self-imposed political correctness hanging over Parliament that does not allow for criticism of Muslims.  If there is to be a way to beat the ever-increasing creep of dhimmi status into Western culture, the behavior of the British administration is not the example to follow. Changes must come from within Islam itself.  Infidels, or kuffir as we are called in Arabic can no more affect the directional change of Islam than can we empty Niagra Falls with a Dixie cup.

The pact of Umar resonates today within Islam as it places restrictions on anything which will show Islam to be equal to any other belief system.  By being the good and faithful dhimmi, we acquiesce to the pact and thus legitimize it as something to be held in esteem by Muslims.  Islam does not need us to be this way, but it does make it easier for Muslims to subjugate and then destroy that which is seen as evil and against Allah.

Many scholars within Islam today maintain that the pact of Umar is valid and applicable to all.  This is true, and can be seen vividly in places as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Yemen and other Islamic enclaves.  Is it real or a fake, and did the Omari Treaty abrogate the Pact of Umar?  Whatever the truth, there is no doubt that Islamic scholars, clerics and respected houses of jurisprudence agree that non-Muslims are not deserving of equal status in Muslim countries.  Not all Muslims feel this way, but when Christians or Jews are subjugated you can bet the Pact of Umar is not far beneath the surface.

 

Climate Change; Can it be Stopped?

A full length article for Environmental Politics class on one of the most debated subjects today.  As I always try to add context no matter the issue, I hope you take this as part of the greater debate we all must be a part of.

Enjoy.

 

Global Climate Change; Can it be stopped?

The question for our age and one which has no solid answer.  I have studied planetary climate models for years and have tried to read as much as has been published, spoken and recorded, and if there is an answer to whether we can abate or reverse this change, it is no.  At this stage in our evolution, even if we completely shut down all industry today and completely revamp civilisational structure, the effect over the long term (30,000+ years) will be negligible.

The raging debate is on anthropogenic effects and how much, if any is causing what we see as climate change.  The problem is there is no consensus; even as thousands of climate scientists (and others) agree that the change is happening, and there are some who ferverently believe that it is 100% mankinds fault, there is not, at this time any concrete analysis of anthropogenic change being solely responsible for climate change.  Even the IPCC reports use words such as “possible” or “chance” or “might be” to show that their research does not give them enough confidence to make ironclad claims.

With all the debate and so much unknown it is difficult for any scientist to say with confidence that man-made creation of CO2 is the only regulator of climate.  Methane is 20X more dangerous than CO2 yet it is not treated as such when calculating climate models, if it is included at all.  Water vapor is a major regulator of weather, as are the Maunder min/max, solar radiation, earth orbit and axis tilt, the Coriolis effect, El Nino, the Pacific Decadel oscillation, the El Nino Decadel oscillation, Hadley and Polar cells, ocean currents and temperature and the ongoing disputes over where weather data collection stations are located.  Add to the mix volcanoes, forest fires, natural coal fires, constantly changing adiabatic collapse rates and the shift in earths albedo depending on all of the above factors and you have a mixed salad of incomplete facts and untested science.  There is no study undertaken so far which takes all of these (and other) variables into effect in computer modeling.  Usually modeling is done which proves the scientists preconceived notions rather than disproving those notions, a very deceiving method of science indeed.

From James Hansen to Roy Spencer the disagreement over exact causal relationships in weather and climate is ongoing, and it appears no one has the right answer.  Yes the climate is changing.  Yes we all need to be much more mindful of what we do and the impact it may have.  Yes our technologies and growth have placed us in a precarious position as to our future, and yes we know all this yet there is very little direct effect we can have on the days climate.  Living simply is a start, challenging commonly accepted beliefs must be done, and changes must be made based in what, as Spock said is “the needs of the many, not the few or the one”

I live simply, and do so by choice because I know it is the best way to manage my life and provide for my neighbors an example of living well by living simply.  I would like all to follow my example, but I cannot force my beliefs on others, I can only try to inform and encourage honest and open debate.  Changes that come will have to be based in common acceptance that the good of all requires us to be good to our home, not on scare tactics, fear of the unknown or false science.  We can be the best stewards for the planet, it is a matter of truth and knowledge and how to use those guidelines for the greatest benefit.

PS, Al Gore just bought a second home.  No recycling, no solar or alternate power sources(yet), a hugh utility bill and a carbon footprint bigger than all of us in class put together.  Anyone see hippocracy here, because I sure do.

PPS; here is a link to MIT and a scientist claiming to have the solution to global climate changes.  Interesting theory that appears to have the potential to work.  http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/511016/a-cheap-and-easy-plan-to-stop-global-warming/

The 100% Solution

Each of us has a grand idea, something that would be the better mousetrap, as it were.  For myself, I have envisioned a method and procedure that I feel would best benefit mankind as a whole.  To quote Spock on his deathbed, “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few…or the one” and with that, let me explain how I see the solution to our problems.  Yes it is simple, but sometimes the simplest plans garner the largest benefits.

Enjoy.

What every Environmentalist needs to know about Capitalism; Monthly Review

This is an amazing article, full of in depth analysis, statistics, numbers and conclusions on capitalism and the environment.  I was particularly struck by the two-sided concept of raising the living standard of poor nations to a level close to our Western ways, and at the same time pointing out that by doing so we may bring about the total collapse of society quicker by increasing the use of natural resources in order to bring about the raise in living standards.  This is a concept I have been concerned about for years, and have tried to make a public debate about it.  I am glad to see this dichotomy brought to light, as I believe it is the greatest single threat to actually changing the living situation for the benefit of those who need it the most.

Capitalism, for all its faults has provided benefits to society at large; I believe it is the individual, and the ego which is the root cause of the downside of capitalism.  There is little argument that pure capitalism, in its early stages provided unmatched opportunities for societal growth and was the main driving force for the global development that we have seen.  It is also obvious that the mechanics of capitalism; profit at the expense of the “little guy” and the environment as a whole ecosystem is the cause of much damage and the financial and ecological distress we are trying to change.

After years of study and research, as well as a personal pratical approach; letting go of the trappings of a modern life such as all the toys one acquires as the wealth increases, I believe I have a solution to the bane of unrestricted capitalism.  I am no economist or social scientist, but I see a simple answer.  A fundamental change in the way business is done that would solve much of the problems we face today; mandate all companies, no matter the size to be non-profit.  I believe we can separate the business owner from the investor/venture capitalist yet still provide a mechanism under which all prosper.

Here is what I envision.  Instead of having profits go to the pockets of those who invest for a return but know nothing about, nor have a personal hand in operating the business, allow the investor to start their own business and take the profits by actually doing the day to day work.  Make them responsible for the startup, running and development, let them take salaries as any business would pay but the net profits would go directly back into the business, allowing for growth that benefits all.  This concept is loosely based in the British NHS healthcare system.  All the insurance companies involved in the system are mandated to be non-profit, a method which not just perpetuates the system but allows for improvement and growth based in need rather than returns on investments, as our insurance companies in the US are set up to do.

Now I realize that this model would fundamentally change how money is moved, used and allocated but I see this as a great equalizer, no one gains excessively but all are free to pursue any line of productive activity they choose, and the money would flow outward to raise all boats.  Your worth is then tied to how you interact with your community, your society and your world and your reward, if you choose can be monitary gain.  It is personal responsibility based in both the personal and the greater good.

Two paradigms are at work here; creating a method for global social change and maintaining a world where all are directly involved in the propagation of a healthy, spiritual and deeply connective civilization that provides all with what is needed to live well, and gives everyone the opportunity to have personal as well as humanistic gain.

This is just one mans opinion, mind you. 

See you on the other side.

Changing the Paradigm

The quest for the earths resources continues unabated, and the least able to withstand the onslaught are quickly being squeezed out of existence.  It is a Paradigm War with the poorest suffering the most.

Enjoy.

Stealing the Land: Profit above the People

   In the report “Paradigm Wars” by Jerry Mander (funny) and Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, the case is expertly laid out showing just how indigenous peoples are the front-line victims of the rapacious greed of those who want nothing less than all the worlds resources at their disposal.  I believe most of us know little about the how and where regarding the extraction of global wealth, and next to nothing about how the local peoples have been, for decades in some places enslaved, depreciated and relegated to less than human status.  The most troubling aspect of these companies and what they are after is how they can, and have taken control of the local water rights. One example talks about a multi-global corporation, Bechtel and how they managed to gain total control over water rights in Bolivia, then began charging $20/month to the locals for their water. First they have NO right to charge indigenous people for their water, as it is a right, solidified over hundreds if not thousands of years of living within a specific area.  The monthly income for that area is $100/month, the cost for water effectively destroyed the locals ability to use the water they had been using for generations.  All in the name of profit, mind you for the shareholders of Bechtel, and their CEO, COO, CFO and all the other high ranking administrators.  Disgusting, if you ask me.

Today it is no better, indigenous peoples are still losing their land at a expanded pace and the earth is being stripped of more and more of it’s wealth.  Google earth is a great place to see how we are cutting deep into our Mother; look at the Amazon rain forest and you can see, from tens of miles up hugh swaths of land cleared for both meat and plant protein sources.

Ironically, as I am writing this there is a program on OPB about a corporation in California that is doing exactly what is seen in Africa and South America, except it is happening in our back yard.  The company is called Rio Tinto, and their website says it all.  To quote from their homepage “A leader in finding, mining and extracting the world’s metals and minerals” and this is just the surface of what they do.  Look them up and see how they have taken every advantage of the law, ignorance of locals and support by the government in order to usurp the land and those who were caring for it.

The story of Rio Tinto and their interactions with local California residents is a true microcosm of how the pursuit of payout for investors always overshadows the needs and benefits of local peoples.  Here is the website for Rio Tinto – http://www.riotinto.com/ and you can go to OPB and see the entire program and decide for yourself if what Rio Tinto is doing is really the best for mankind.

The Paradigm Wars continue, but the more exposure given to the practices and behavior of Corps against indigenous peoples is making a difference.  By exposing the light of day to how Corps do business, they will be forced (hopefully soon) to make changes or go out of business.  We can only hope this will happen before the people are no longer able to fight back, simply because they no longer exist.

Se you on the other side.

I have my opinions, don’t confuse me with the facts;

Have we become so inundated with the constant din of news and information that the only solution is to shut it all out, or only filter that with which we are most comfortable with?  How is it that with all the access to the worlds font of knowledge we seem to be more ignorant of the truth and less tolerant of anything which challenges our own view?  I am constantly stunned when, after some important or impacful event occurs a good number of people either know nothing, or spout incomplete perceptions as if it was gospel.  Those with the loudest opinions always seem to be the ones with the least interest in learning the entire picture, preferring to rely on their own views (correct or not) as a basis to bark out what is right.

Case in point; spouting false science as if it were unassailable.  In my Environmental Politics class we have begun the discussion about climate change.  Mind you, I am convinced that global change is occuring, I am far from convinced it is primarily man’s fault.  As the teacher, Stan Taylor began his latest lecture on the weather he mentioned that the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere was the cause of temperatures rising.  A statement taken as absolute truth by those who believe man is the cause of the climate change…Unfortunately this is false science; the truth is that temperature increases cause rising CO2 levels, and it sometimes takes hundreds of years for the effect to occur.  I made the point to the class what the real science was, and even before I could finish my statement the teacher abruptly cut me off and went on to another student with another comment.  I saw the reaction on the faces of my fellow students and the teacher, suffice to say it was as if I had questioned their very existence.  I know some of my fellow students have done little if any research on their own to validate my point, most of them swallow whole whatever is put before them and do not question anything.

I was taught to question everything, to ask the tough ones and to demand answers.  I learned that to be truly informed one must spend the time to validate what is being presented, take nothing at face value until proved and if there are questions, never stop asking for details.  Some students choose to ingest only those sources which validate their worldview, never venturing outside the box to find out if what they know is truth, or if it is to be debated in an open forum.  Watching only MSNBC or worse, the Daily Show presents no complete perspective, as would watching only FOX News or Rush Limbaugh.   Limited input results in an incomplete judgement, a trait that is being taught in college today.  Asking a question that gives the teacher the chance to bolster a prevalent viewpoint is the norm; challenging the common meme is forbidden and is usually dismissed out of hand.

I challenge everything I hear and expect to be rewarded with an enlightened opinion based in facts.  I despair at how young ones today, and many elders take for granted that what they choose to hear is the only listening they need to do.  I pity those who refuse, for whatever reason to never have their paradigms challenged.  Finally, let me leave with this quote from one of the greatest newsmen of the 20th century, Edward R. Murrow on the importance of knowing the difference;

“The speed of communications is wondrous to behold.  It is also true that speed can multiply the distribution of information that we know to be untrue.”

Read everything.  Then decide for yourself.

See you on the other side.

Pimping at LCC update

On Monday, Feb 11 at 1PM on LCC campus, Art bldg (11) there will be a meeting between a Dean (don’t know which one), a rep of the Women’s Center and students to discuss the prostitution article in the Torch. We hope to garner attention to this egregious use of student funds supporting prostitution and will demand apologies, statements from administrators and retractions by the Torch, among other demands. We hope to have many people there to voice their opposition to the exploitation of women, the degradation of sex to a business and the appalling support of prostitution for tuition.  Please tell your friends, family, anyone you know to come and be a voice for change.  I also urge you to contact Lane Community College and let them know that what they are doing is not just unethical and immoral, but also most likely illegal.  You can find all the contact information at http://www2.lanecc.edu/contact and it is best to address your complaints to the President, Mary Spilde and her direct email is spildem@lanecc.edu.  When you contact them please be polite and civil, but let your beliefs be known in the strongest possible terms.  The main phone line at LCC is 541-463-3000.  The students deserve better, the citizens/taxpayers deserve better and the people deserve better behavior from their community college than what has been shown up to now.

Here is the link to the Torch article for review.  http://www.lcctorch.com/2013/02/06/welcome-to-the-meets-market/