Supreme Court: Marriage is between ‘two persons’

From WorldMag.com (June 26):

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Supreme Court today legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in a sweeping, moralizing opinion written by Justice Anthony Kennedy. He delivered the ruling softly and without much expression, but outside the courtroom, huge crowds swarmed the Supreme Court plaza in celebration, singing the national anthem.

As anticipated since the high court first took up the case, the ruling was 5-4, with Kennedy joining the court’s liberals: Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. The dissenters—Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito—each penned separate dissents, an expression of profound frustration. Scalia opened his apoplectic dissent, concurring with Roberts’ dissent, by saying, “I write separately to call attention to this court’s threat to American democracy.”

“Just who do we think we are?” Roberts asked in the courtroom. “This is a court, not a legislature.”  [read more]

Is this what Obama meant by radically transforming the country?

Here are a couple more questions I have:

Do all religions institutions (like Islam) have to marry gay couples if it is against their religious beliefs? Or is this only for Christian churches?

What about group marriage, triads, polygamy (which devote Muslims like), and polyandry? If you redefine what marriage is then basically any kind of adult relationship can be made legal. The Supreme Court didn’t exempt any of the above groups. I wouldn’t be surprised if the above groups don’t start making their case. After all triads just love each other too and want to be happy.  And if you don’t believe in these alternative forms of marriage then you are a bigot.

If this age where a white woman can identify as a black woman and be considered normal why don’t one of the gay partners identify as a member of the opposite sex. Problem solved. The gay couple then can identify as a male-female marriage. Okay, that was a joke.

Will your self-driving car be programmed to kill you if it means saving more strangers?

From ScienceDaily.com (June 15):

Imagine you are in charge of the switch on a trolley track. The express is due any minute; but as you glance down the line you see a school bus, filled with children, stalled at the level crossing. No problem; that's why you have this switch. But on the alternate track there's more trouble: Your child, who has come to work with you, has fallen down on the rails and can't get up. That switch can save your child or a bus-full of others, but not both. What do you do?

Death in the driver's seat

So should your self-driving car be programmed to kill you in order to save others? There are two philosophical approaches to this type of question, Barghi says. "Utilitarianism tells us that we should always do what will produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people," he explained. In other words, if it comes down to a choice between sending you into a concrete wall or swerving into the path of an oncoming bus, your car should be programmed to do the former.

Deontology, on the other hand, argues that "some values are simply categorically always true," Barghi continued. "For example, murder is always wrong, and we should never do it." Going back to the trolley problem, "even if shifting the trolley will save five lives, we shouldn't do it because we would be actively killing one," Barghi said. And, despite the odds, a self-driving car shouldn't be programmed to choose to sacrifice its driver to keep others out of harm's way.

Every variation of the trolley problem -- and there are many: What if the one person is your child? Your only child? What if the five people are murderers? -- simply "asks the user to pick whether he has chosen to stick with deontology or utilitarianism," Barghi continued. If the answer is utilitarianism, then there is another decision to be made, Barghi adds: rule or act utilitarianism.  [read more]

Something to think about. Keep in mind with self-driving cars the “driver” (I put driver in quotes because is he/she actually driving if the car is self-autonomous? Isn’t the person actually a passenger? Anyway…) isn’t making the decisions. It’s the programmer who wrote the code who works for the car manufacturer that makes the decisions. It’s his/her ethics the car will follow. And if the programmer has to follow gov’t regulations from National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. then who knows what will happen.

6 things you need to know about virtual reality (from the guy who’s doing it right)

From Ideas.Ted.com (June 12):

For all the hoo-hah and fanfare around next-generation technologies like Oculus Rift and Google Cardboard, it’s still early days for virtual reality. Sure, we’ve come a long way from clunky simulators (even ones with wind machines that blew back your hair), but the field is still pretty much open for all comers. Filmmaker Chris Milk (TED Talk: How virtual reality can create the ultimate empathy machine) is bullish about the possibilities. Here, the man who melted the Internet with “have you seen it yet?” projects blending technology and music for the likes of Arcade Fire and Johnny Cash mulls the possibilities of the medium he’s betting on in a big way.

The key to VR? It’s the sound. When you think of virtual reality, you probably picture it: a 360-degree environment full of immersive vistas. But it’s the sound that makes it real, Milk says. He first grasped this while watching Hunger in Los Angeles, an early VR film by Nonny de la Peña, which places the audience in the middle of a street scene. It grabbed him immediately, but not for the reasons he expected: “The visuals were not photorealistic; she’d recreated the scene with blocky CGI characters,” he says. “But what really affected me the most was the audio, because it was real. Basically, she’d recorded a food bank line where somebody had a diabetic seizure and everybody was talking. You could walk around the characters and the scene, and it was really affecting.”

The old rules don’t apply. Like many VR pioneers, Milk has brought years of filmmaking experience to his work inside the goggles — and now he’s setting it all aside. “As a director, the main tools I use are framing, performance and editing,” Milk explains. “Through framing I show you exactly what I want you to see in the screen; I capture the performances using different angles of framing, and then I edit it all together into something. Those tools go completely out the window with virtual reality.” One by one, all the long-held rules of filmmaking fall away. “Everything’s a total experiment,” he says.  [read more]

Interesting article.

The New Congressional Plan to Repeal and Replace Obamacare

From Daily Signal.com (June 5):

A group of House Republicans unveiled a 192-page health care plan that fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with “patient-centered reforms” and “free-market solutions.”

Lawmakers released the plan Thursday as the GOP-led Congress prepares to attack the Affordable Care Act. Both houses of Congress have already signaled their intentions to repeal Obamacare by a simple majority vote using the reconciliation process—just as the law was passed in 2010.

The new GOP plan, American Health Care Reform Act, was written by Reps. Phil Roe of Tennessee and Austin Scott of Georgia. It has the backing of the Republican Study Committee, a caucus made up of nearly 170 members of the House of Representatives.

The American Health Care Reform Act covers four broad areas:

1. Encouraging Competition in the Health Care Market. The proposed legislation addresses this issue by allowing Americans to purchase health insurance products across state lines. Small businesses also are permitted to merge together to coordinate better rates.
2. Improving Access for Vulnerable Americans. Under the bill, premiums would be capped at 200 percent of the state’s premium average. Additionally, those with pre-existing conditions can alternate between health insurance markets, provided they maintain “continuous coverage.”
3. Supporting Medical Breakthroughs. The bill provides funding for an eight-year, $15 billion Medical Breakthrough Fund at the National Institutes of Health to develop cures for the top five causes of death in the United States: heart disease, cancer, strokes, Alzheimer’s, and diabetes. These conditions kill more than 1.5 million people each year.
4. Reforming Medical Liability Laws. Solutions include requiring review by an independent panel prior to malpractice discovery and a “voluntary right of removal to federal court so long as there is a federal payer or a federal statute.” Barr said that this reform increases the quality of care by establishing national guidelines for physicians to follow and helps reduce “frivolous lawsuits.”

[read more]

Well, it’s a good start. The lawmakers could add that if a person wants he/she can pay out-of-pocket their medical bills. Especially if the patient is rich, then they don’t need to or even want to purchase insurance. 

Buy why 192 pages? That’s still less than the 1,000 page boondoggle knows as Obamacare. Couldn’t the lawmakers get it down to 20 – 50 pages?

The question is if the bill passes Congress will Obama veto it? Probably. Obamacare is his baby and he doesn’t want his baby to go away. That’s why we really need a president that will sign into law this bill or a bill similar to it.

By the way, the pdf  link on the Daily Signal website is just a 9-page summary of the bill. The pdf link on this page is the full text.

The Coming of the Islamic State was Foretold 10 Years Ago. And No One Listened.

From The Blaze.com (June 8):

Although the birth of the Islamic State and the herald of the caliphate are often regarded as some of 2014’s “big shockers,” they were foretold in striking detail and with an accurate timeline by an Al Qaeda insider nearly one decade ago.

On August 12, 2005, Spiegel Online International published an article titled “The Future of Terrorism: What Al Qaeda Really Wants.” Written by Yassin Musharbash, the article was essentially a review of a book written by Fouad Hussein, a Jordanian journalist with close access to Al Qaeda and its affiliates, including the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who pioneered the videotaping of beheadings “to strike terror into the hearts” of infidels (Koran 3:151).

As Hussein explained in the introduction of his book “Al Zarqawi: Al Qaeda’s Second Generation”: “I interviewed a whole range of Al Qaeda members with different ideologies to get an idea of how the war between the terrorists and Washington would develop in the future.”

In what follows, I [Raymond Ibrahim] reproduce the seven phases of Al Qaeda’s master plan as presented in Musharbash’s nearly 10-year-old article, (emphasis added in bold) with my commentary interspersed for context. Phases four and five are of particular importance as they describe the goals for recent times, much of which have come to fruition according to plan.

The First Phase. Known as “the awakening”—this has already been carried out and was supposed to have lasted from 2000 to 2003, or more precisely from the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 in New York and Washington to the fall of Baghdad in 2003. The aim of the attacks of 9/11 was to provoke the U.S. into declaring war on the Islamic world and thereby “awakening” Muslims. “The first phase was judged by the strategists and masterminds behind al-Qaeda as very successful,” writes Hussein. “The battle field was opened up and the Americans and their allies became a closer and easier target.” The terrorist network is also reported as being satisfied that its message can now be heard “everywhere.”

The Second Phase. “Opening Eyes” is, according to Hussein’s definition, the period we are now in [writing in 2005] and should last until 2006. Hussein says the terrorists hope to make the western conspiracy aware of the “Islamic community.” Hussein believes this is a phase in which al-Qaeda wants an organization to develop into a movement. The network is banking on recruiting young men during this period. Iraq should become the center for all global operations, with an “army” set up there and bases established in other Arabic states.

The Third Phase. This is described as “Arising and Standing Up” and should last from 2007 to 2010. “There will be a focus on Syria,” prophesies Hussein, based on what his sources told him. The fighting cadres are supposedly already prepared and some are in Iraq. Attacks on Turkey and—even more explosive— in Israel are predicted. Al Qaeda’s masterminds hope that attacks on Israel will help the terrorist group become a recognized organization. The author also believes that countries neighboring Iraq, such as Jordan, are also in danger.

The Fourth Phase. Between 2010 and 2013, Hussein writes that Al Qaeda will aim to bring about the collapse of the hated Arabic governments. The estimate is that “the creeping loss of the regimes’ power will lead to a steady growth in strength within Al Qaeda.” At the same time attacks will be carried out against oil suppliers and the US economy will be targeted using cyber terrorism.

The Fifth Phase. This will be the point at which an Islamic state, or caliphate, can be declared. The plan is that by this time, between 2013 and 2016, Western influence in the Islamic world will be so reduced and Israel weakened so much, that resistance will not be feared. Al Qaeda hopes that by then the Islamic state will be able to bring about a new world order. [read more]

Yea, all of the stages are pretty prophetic. The last two stages doesn’t get any better.

ISIS and the Sykes-Picot Agreement

From Glenn Beck.com (Sept. 9, 2014):

“I think this hour will change your perspective. It will also help you understand what’s really happening with ISIS and ISIL… What is the real objective,” Glenn said. “Out of all of the peace accords and the cease-fires and the nonviolent pledges, none of them ever get to the root of the problem, and that is the ‘why.’ Until the why is addressed, the cycle of violence and hate is just going to continue.”

So how do get to the root of the why? Glenn started with a timeline that many have probably seen before. It included the 2014 Israeli/Hamas conflict, the 2012 Gaza conflict, the Second Intifada (2000), the First Intifada, the 1968 Six Day War, and the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. While most timelines documented the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would end there, Glenn took it a step further – all the way to the beginning of World War I.

“The world is at war for the first time, and it is divided,” Glenn said. “You have the Allied Powers… and then you have in the purple the Central Powers. The Allies: U.S., Britain, France, Russia, Italy, Romania, Serbia. And then the Central Powers, the bad guys, if you will, of World War I: Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and the Ottoman Empire.”

“This is the last time the Arab world had a united Islamic state led by a religious leader, the Ottoman Empire, the caliphate,” he explained. “The Allies knew the Ottoman Empire could shut down key shipping routes effectively and then cripple Britain’s economy, France. So they knew the Ottoman Empire was going to be a problem. They had to neutralize it.”

Neutralizing the power of the Ottoman Empire was at the center of western strategy at this point in time. Great Britain sent an army officer by the name of T.E. Lawrence to the Middle East to convince Arab leaders to fight against the Ottomans.  [read more]

Lawrence promised the Arab leaders the moon and the stars including rule over a new united Arab kingdom of Greater Syria.

But Lawrence never kept his promise. He never intended to keep it.  Then enter the Sykes-Picot Agreement between Britain, France and Russia which divided up the area. Ever heard the strategy divide-and-conquer? That’s exactly what this agreement did that the Arabs agreed to.

Here the key points when considering the history of the conflict:

1. The Sykes-Picot agreement
2. The desire for a united Arab kingdom
3. The western desire to maintain economic control of the Middle East
4. The quest to regain control of ‘Greater Syria’
5. The Jewish and Palestinian people are nothing more than pawns in this larger game

The Arab leaders new the only way to consolidate power (read: caliphate) once again was to unite around a common enemy, and that enemy was the Jews.

And to kill off the leaders of the countries in the region and have a Islamic revolution is also part of the strategy. Which is what ISIS is trying to do.  They know about the promise even if Americans including Obama don’t

So, what is President Obama doing about this crisis? Nothing. And what’s worse he admits he doesn’t have a strategy. Which is what he said back in 2014. He is either incompetent or doesn’t care. Maybe both.

In other news: Islamic State Working to Develop Chemical Weapons.

So, we have ISIS committing acts against humanity. And there is Russia acting aggressive. Can you say WWIII? Add China into the mix…

Russia’s Internet Research Agency

From The New York Times.com (June 2):

Around 8 :30 a.m. on Sept. 11 last year, Duval Arthur, director of the Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness for St. Mary Parish, Louisiana, got a call from a resident who had just received a disturbing text message. “Toxic fume hazard warning in this area until 1:30 PM,” the message read. “Take Shelter. Check Local Media and columbiachemical.com.”

St. Mary Parish is home to many processing plants for chemicals and natural gas, and keeping track of dangerous accidents at those plants is Arthur’s job. But he hadn’t heard of any chemical release that morning. In fact, he hadn’t even heard of Columbia Chemical. St. Mary Parish had a Columbian Chemicals plant, which made carbon black, a petroleum product used in rubber and plastics. But he’d heard nothing from them that morning, either. Soon, two other residents called and reported the same text message. Arthur was worried: Had one of his employees sent out an alert without telling him?

If Arthur had checked Twitter, he might have become much more worried. Hundreds of Twitter accounts were documenting a disaster right down the road. “A powerful explosion heard from miles away happened at a chemical plant in Centerville, Louisiana #ColumbianChemicals,” a man named Jon Merritt tweeted. The #ColumbianChemicals hashtag was full of eyewitness accounts of the horror in Centerville. @AnnRussela shared an image of flames engulfing the plant. @Ksarah12 posted a video of surveillance footage from a local gas station, capturing the flash of the explosion. Others shared a video in which thick black smoke rose in the distance.  [read more]

To cut to the chase all of what you just read was a hoax perpetrated by Russia. Specifically, by their Internet Research Agency to try to destabilize America. To try to make anyone who uses the internet not to trust what they read.

What did you expect? Putin is ex-KGB. What this agency is doing is similar to what the KGB has done in the past.

Immigration Interview for America

Maybe America should have an immigration interview similar to job interviews. For instance these questions could be asked for all potential citizens:

• Why do you (the immigrant) want to come to this country? 
• What value can you can add to the country?
• What do you think of capitalism?
• What do you think of the concept of liberty?

When an employer interviews a job applicant one of the things the person is looking for how is the potential employee is going to fit into the culture of the company. Maybe we should look at how immigrants can fit into America. Like following the laws of the land. Not being anti-American.

According to Discover The Networks.org Mexico has similar guidelines for its country:

• Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress."
• Immigration officials must "ensure" that immigrants will not only be useful additions to Mexico, but that they have the necessary funds to sustain themselves and their dependents.
• Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics"; if they are deemed to be detrimental to "economic or national interests"; if they have broken Mexican laws; and if they are not found to be “physically or mentally healthy."

Evidently the Mexican gov’t  is not for open borders.

Under Canadian immigration laws if a person wants to be a permanent citizen he/she under what’s called the Independent class. The class is defined as a  “professional class or skilled worker class and the application is assessed based on a point system. An individual should make an application under this class if he/she wishes to come to Canada based on his/her qualification, work experience and knowledge of English or French language.” There is also the Entrepreneur class, investor class or self employed class if a person wants to start a business in Canada or just wants to invest in Canada without starting a business in Canada. Finally, there is the Family class where a person can immigrant if he/she has a close relative in Canada.

The immigration forms asked about your knowledge of English and French. Your education and jobs you have in the past 10 years. It even asks about your spouses employment history. The form also asks about net worth and any debt. Evidently Canada only wants the wealthy to come. Hmmm.

United Kingdom has similar classes but they call them “tiers.” “ Tier 1 (General) Migrant, a Tier 1 (Investor) Migrant, a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrant, a Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) Migrant, a highly skilled migrant, a Businessperson, an Innovator, an Investor, a self-employed lawyer or a writer, composer or artist, the applicant must have been employed in the UK continuously throughout the five years…” Tier 1 is the highest tier. It’s what UK calls the “high value immigrants.” No kidding. It’s interesting that they had to go into such detail about the Exceptional Talent. Was composer or artist really necessary?

Under UK’s point system you get more points: if you have a Ph. D., make a lot of money previously, and are under the age of 28. So, UK’s motto is: give us your intelligent, your rich and your young. Interesting.

Here’s France’s immigration policy: “[F]oreign-born persons may request to be naturalized if such persons have resided continuously in France for five years prior to filing of the request. French nationality in this case is given in the discretion of the French High Administrative Authority (Conseil d'Etat) if the French speaking person can show that his acts in France have been meritorious and contributing to French prosperity. The above-mentioned five-year period may be reduced to two years if the foreign-born person successfully performed two years of higher education in France. “