Homeland Security’s Version of “Minority Report”

From The Blaze.com (May 30):

Straight out of Minority Report a new Homeland Security program would subject Americans to pre-crime interrogations and physiological scans to detect people who are intending to commit a terrorist act at sports stadiums, malls, airports and other public places has moved closer to being implemented after the FAST program passed its first round of testing at an undisclosed location in northeast US.

The system uses a computer program that studies physiological indicators of a person, such as heart rate and the steadiness of a person’s gaze, and then uses the data to make a judgment on whether that individual has “mal-intent”. [source]

Unnerving. FAST is an acronym for Future Attribute Screening Technology.  The question is when this technology detects Obama or one of this radical associates will it judge them as “mal-intent”?

The DHS website gives a little more info about the technology to clear things up:

The system will measure both physiological and behavioral signals to make probabilistic assessments of mal-intent based on sensor outputs and advanced fusion algorithms and measure indicators using culturally neutral and non-invasive sensors.

Did you understand all that? There will be a test on it later. Advanced fusion algorithms? Huh? Culturally neutral? (Read: it will not judge you if you are a Muslim.) Gotta love those gov’t technocrats.

On that same webpage the DHS also has an Insider Threat Detection Project. I wonder if it will detect Obama as an insider threat? Just wondering.

USDA fines Missouri family $90k for selling a few rabbits without a license

From News.Yahoo.com (May 24):

It started out as a hobby, a way for the Dollarhite family in Dixa, Mo., to teach a teenage son responsibility. Like a lemonade stand.

But now, selling a few hundred rabbits over two years has provoked the heavy hand of the federal government to the tune of a $90,643 fine. The fine was levied more than a year after authorities contacted family members, prompting them to immediately halt their part-time business and liquidate their equipment.

John and Judy Dollarhite began selling rabbit meat by the pound in 2006, and as pets to neighbors and friends in 2008.

Raised on the three-acre lot on which their home sits, the rabbits were heralded by local experts for their quality and kept in pristine condition.

When a local pet store asked them to supply their pet rabbits, the Dollarhites had no idea they would be running afoul of an obscure federal regulation that prohibits selling more than $500 worth of rabbits to a pet store without a license from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Under the law, pet stores are exempt from regulation. [read more]

First the FDA goes after Amish farmers now the USDA is going after other private citizens trying to earn a living. The gov’t is just out of control. $90,000 for a few rabbits? It’s just plain ridiculous.

I’m starting to think every gov’t agency should be examined to see if it has a legitimate function or not. If it does not, then shut it down.

Feds cracks down on Amish farmers for selling raw milk

From the EU Times.net (April 30):

A yearlong sting operation, including aliases, a 5 a.m. surprise inspection and surreptitious purchases from an Amish farm in Pennsylvania, culminated in the federal government announcing this week that it has gone to court to stop Rainbow Acres Farm from selling its contraband to willing customers in the Washington area.

The product in question: unpasteurized milk.

It’s a battle that’s been going on behind the scenes for years, with natural foods advocates arguing that raw milk, as it’s also known, is healthier than the pasteurized product, while the Food and Drug Administration says raw milk can carry harmful bacteria such as salmonella, E. coli and listeria. [read more]

Doesn’t the FDA have anything better to do than going after farmers? I don’t care if the agency thinks adults shouldn’t be drinking unpasteurized milk. That’s none of their concern. Haven’t people been drinking unpasteurized milk  before it  pasteurizing became common? Has there been massive amounts of people getting violently sick from unpasteurized milk?

It almost seems like the FDA is treating these farmers like Al Capone selling moonshine or something. I seriously doubt the Amish would sell unpasteurized milk on the black market but other dairy farmers might. The FDA is turning the farmers into common criminals. What’s next speakeasies for people who want to drink unpasteurized milk?

What I Would Cut

I took the “What Would You Cut?” survey from The Heritage Foundation.
Below is a summary of the money I want Washington to save taxpayers in the upcoming 2012 fiscal budget:
Department of Education:                                         Cut $15 billion
Obamacare:                                                                             Cut $5 billion
2009 Federal Stimulus Program:                          Cut $60 billion
Welfare/Entitlement Waste and Fraud:            Cut $10 billion
Excessive Pay for Civilian Federal Workers: Cut $40 billion
TOTAL SAVINGS from these five areas alone:            $130 billion!
The Foundation says they will use my recommendations to guide their efforts to educate lawmakers about spending cuts. These cuts, by the way, are the maximum cuts you could choose on the survey.
America has to get serious about cutting the budget and the size of gov’t.  And if Congress raises the debt ceiling again they are crazy. Then it’s not a ceiling. It’s a hot air balloon.
Congress should read the book or pdf file Downsizing the Federal Government on what suggestions to cut. It’s a very detailed plan. The author goes over a lot of government agencies and programs.

Social Chaos and Human Needs

People have to save the basic needs met first. This includes hunger, thirst, sleep, and getting rid of bodily waste. 

Once the basic needs are met then secondary needs like safety and societal order come next.

After the secondary needs are met then the higher order needs or wants come into play. Love, belonging, etc.

During social chaos like a revolution the secondary needs and higher order needs tended to be not met because you are too worried for your safety. Revolutionaries know this. That is the inside-out part that Van Jones was talking about. People want the government (the top-down part) to restore safety and order. Then the radicals can remake society into their own vision.

Obama adviser: American freedom, equality are just 'myths'

From WND.com (May 4):

President Obama's faith adviser, Eboo Patel, blasted what he called the "myths" of America – describing them as beliefs that the country is "a land of freedom and equality and justice."

Patel explained how he used the "faith-based movement" to channel his rage at America "in a direction far more compassionate and far more merciful."

Patel, a Muslim activist from Chicago, further implied that had he grown up in the 1960s, he may have joined the Weather Underground terrorist group led by William Ayers.  [read more]

This guy is a faith advisor? Geez. Then again he is a radical like Obama so go figure. Having people like this around him like this it’s not helping to counter the belief that Obama is a true-believing radical. After all you are judged by the company you keep.

When a radical talks about “a direction far more compassionate” that’s code words for spreading-the-wealth-around. And “far more merciful” means social justice.

CIA chief: Waterboarding aided bin Laden raid

From MSNBC.com (May 3):

WASHINGTON — Intelligence garnered from waterboarded detainees was used to track down al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and kill him, CIA Chief Leon Panetta told NBC News on Tuesday.

"Enhanced interrogation techniques" were used to extract information that led to the mission's success, Panetta said during an interview with anchor Brian Williams. Those techniques included waterboarding, he acknowledged. [read more]

And just think Obama put an end to waterboarding, a technique used during the Bush administration that helped track down bin Laden. Waterboarding to me isn’t torture. Yea, it will probably scare the devil out of you (just like any good horror movie) but it doesn’t cause a lot of physical pain or damage. That’s my definition of torture—lots of intentional physical pain or damage inflicted on a person. Play X genre of music to a person that doesn’t like X is not physical torture. Or keeping him standing all night isn’t either.

Did Panetta say in that interview that Obama wanted bin Laden killed and not captured at all? Or am I just reading into something that isn’t there. I really don’t care if that was originally the plan. No trial. That’ll save the taxpayers money and emotional pain.

If the Obama administration doesn’t want bin Laden death picture shown then how about showing a computer-generated picture? Heck, I’ll take a pencil drawing of his death. Show me something! I don’t think recreations would tick off the already crazed Jihadists. I would think killing bin Laden would have already done that.

The Dynamics of Islamic Violence

Pretty much sums it up. Notice what factors are not in this diagram: Education level, economic status, and US occupation. That’s because those factors aren’t important if they are important at all. The Islamists attacked the US Navy back in the 1800’s—way before the Iraq and Afghanistan occupation. Why do you think the marines got the nickname of “leathernecks”? Look it up (you can even look it up on my blog).

Source of diagram: The Roots of Jihad. A very revealing book.

As I write this (May 1) Osama Bin Laden (the goat fornicator) was killed by US special forces. Good for them! Good riddens to that murderer.

The navy dumped the dirtbag’s body in the ocean. Good idea. I hope the waters were shark infested. But why clean the murder’s body and wrap it in silk? That’s not going to make any Muslim happy if you are dumping the body in the water. Some kind of weird Muslim outreach program I guess. And the shark’s aren’t going to care if he is clean and wrapped in silk or not.

Advice to a Young Scientist

The following advice is from the late Turing award winner computer science professor E. W. Dijkstra. I believe the advice was given mainly to a computer scientist but it could apply to any scientist:

• Raise your standards as high as you can live with, avoid wasting your time on routine problems, and always try to work as closely as possible at the boundary of your abilities. Do this because it is the only way of discovering how that boundary should be moved forward.
• We all like our work to be socially relevant and scientifically sound. If we can find a topic satisfying both desires, we are lucky; if the two targets are in conflict with each other, let the requirement of scientific soundness prevail.
• Never tackle a problem of which you can be pretty sure that (now or in the near future) it will be tackled by others who are, in relation to that problem, at least as competent and well-equipped as you are.
• Write as if your work is going to be studied by a thousand people.
• Don't get enamored with the complexities you have learned to live with (be they of your own making or imported). The lurking suspicion that something could be simplified is the world's richest source of rewarding challenges.
• Before embarking on an ambitious project, try to kill it.
• Remember that research with a big R is rarely mission-oriented and plan in terms of decades, not years. Resist all pressure —be it financial or cultural— to do work that is of ephemeral significance at best.
• Don't strive for recognition (in whatever form): recognition should not be your goal, but a symptom that your work has been worthwhile.
• Avoid involvement in projects so vague that their failure could remain invisible: such involvement tends to corrupt one's scientific integrity.
• Striving for perfection is ultimately the only justification for the academic enterprise; if you don't feel comfortable with this goal —e.g. because you think it too presumptuous—, stay out!

If the Leftist scientists would follow this advice we would have better science. Global warming definitely does not follow the second to the last advice.

What Obama Should Disclose

First, I like to say that I believed Obama was born in this country even before he showed his certificate of live birth. Hillary Clinton during her primary run was the one who started questioning his birthplace. Don’t you think if she found out he wasn’t born in America that she would have blown him out of the water? We would have the first women president instead of the first black president. The way John McCain ran his campaign he probably would have lost against Hillary too.

Whatever your opinion of Donald Trump you have to admit he is not afraid of Obama. He will take it to Obama. If McCain was less afraid during his campaign he might be president. Politics is war. Democrats understand this. It is about time the Republicans understand this mindset too.

No, what Obama should disclose is everyone who donated money to his presidential campaign the first time. He should have disclosed this when he was running since he ran on a platform of transparency in gov’t. McCain disclosed everyone who contributed to him. Why not you Obama? Why are you hiding your campaign donators?

And who is advising you that is not on your staff? Possibly George Soros? Who was advising you for two years while you were not talking to your staff? Hmmm?