Brain Drain

Milestone #2

Wed, 19 Mar 2008 06:24:29 GMT

WOW!!! Six months later ( almost ) - no new posts ( except for this one) and my stats have doubled!

2083 visitors! - i am impressed with your good taste, people!

For any of you who can handle a MORE spiriutal (but still just as as irreverant! - not the same as irrelevant!!) side of the Brain Drain's author feel free to visit: lovewillbringustogether.wordpress.com ... its where i post most these days.

Thank you all who drop in - your visits and comments are most gratifying.

EV'reee-BODeee-wants-to rule-the-Wuuuurrllddd-AH!

(3000 by June!)

Milestone

Sat, 06 Oct 2007 09:35:03 GMT

YAYYYYYY!!!

Brain Drain just got it's 1000th viewing!! : )

Ok, so maybe 896 were me viewing my own site and another hundred or so were from people googling the wrong kind of braindrain, but in just 2 and a half short years over 5 people might have viewed what i write out of something bordering on interest! : )

Now lets see if i can make 10,000 views!

Today, Windows Live Spaces - TOMORROW THE WORRLLLDDDD!!!!! HahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaH!

(ok - maybe not tomorrow?)

I Knew There Was A Good Reason to Mistrust Cats...

Fri, 05 Oct 2007 06:24:05 GMT

I watched my favourite Science magazine show last night and something i had not considered before was made clearer to me.

Toxoplasma tachyzooites!! they are worrying...

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s2050191.htm

For those not willing to follow the whole thing I'll give you the basic idea.

Rats have been found to have a unique kind of parasite ( well not really all that unique actually - but what it does is extraordinary!)

The parasite ensures it's life cycle continues by getting rats to adopt suicidal tendencies.

It does this by living in the little rat brains and neutralising that part of the brain that makes rats terrified of cats!

So, when faced with a cat that can rip the rat to shreds it does not follow it's basic instinct to turn and run away - it hangs around and waits for the cat to follow it's instincts and rip the rat to shreds ( if it is a hungry or merely bored cat looking for something new to kill). This serves the parasites need for a cat to infect to enable it to become a fully fledged adult parasite which it does not do in the rat.

The frightening part?

40 % of humans carry the same parasite, thanks to either their cat or eating some kinds of uncooked meat.

Here's a little tid-bit you may find interesting:

Other parasites are much more common in human populations. Some may have the ability to enact subtle, but long-term, changes in behaviour – to the extent of changing personality. The most notable example is Toxoplasma gondii. This parasite is primarily of concern because it can cause pathology under some circumstances. Obstetricians warn expectant mothers that this parasite can pass through the womb and blaze through an immunologically immature fetus (resulting in blindness, permanent central nervous system dam-age or death). Toxoplasmosis is also a significant mortality source of the immune suppressed. Nevertheless,clinical cases are rare compared with latent toxoplasmosis that occurs, on average, in 40% of adults (average estimates vary). Although the medical profession treats these latent cases as asymptomatic and clinically unimportant (Webster, 2001), accumulating evidence indicates that the infected 40% behave in subtle, but statistically different ways from the uninfected 60%.;

"Look What he Cat Dragged in"; Kevin D Lafferty.

www.lifesci.ucsb.edu/eemb/labs/kuris/pubs/Lafferty_05_BP.pdf

Just what the parasite does to human brains or their fear response is not fully researched just yet but one study has shown people (women actually) with the parasite have a 250% greater chance of being killed in a car crash than those ( women) who don't!!!

You still think cats are better pets than dogs??

God and Man - A Troubled Relationship (repost)

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 03:07:34 GMT

(Sure it's a little long but the message IS Important and needs some time to express and absorb)

The biggest problem man has in understanding God is that most of his understanding comes from Organised Religion which must maintain a delicate balancing act, sitting between both man and his Maker and man and his Overlords. (at least in Judeo-Christian religions; other major religions such as Islam, Shintoism, Hinduism and the 'naturalistic' religions require their preists to just come between man and God).

Preists rely upon us lesser mortals for their daily bread and upon Kings or Presidents for their existance in one country. God, much as they would like us to believe otherwise, does not feed them from his own pocket, but from our human ones. If we suddenly realised that God was actually able to communicate with us directly without preistly guidance for interpretation of the Divine Word, the dole office would be up to it's ears in a priestly 'surplus'.

And so, for 2 millenia now, christian preists have ensured their own welfare by teaching us 'all' about God, or all they can get away with and still keep themselves in a job.

Occasionally some priests disagreed upon the division of the spoils and perhaps even over aspects of 'the One True God' and so split from a group and started a new flock for their own.

In Medieval England a new religion was required when the King of Catholic England needed a divorce and the church wouldn't grant him one, Anglicanism and the various schisms that derived from it was the result.

All schism's retained the formulation of the original Christian model: someone has to explain the real word of God and understanding of God to us dumb simple folk... and earn a living from it in the process. It is known as 'Ministering' or ADDministering for short.

The great problem with that is the dumb simple folk then follow someone else's idea (perhaps many times removed from the parishioners) of what God actually is rather than perfecting just their own one-on-one understanding.

In one sense, the priests role can be viewed as a 'useful' service for arbitrating against the natural tendency of many humans to disagree on certain essential points, as we can be so wont to do in matters spiritual (as well as many others such as political, sexual and intellectual). But my feeling from observation of the past 2000 years of christian history is that, in general, we would be far better off without priests and if we just stuck to the 'everyman is my brother' theory and had respect for a divergence of thought and belief in order to be able to better view the entirity of an infinite 'being' such as God, when compared to a finite being, such as the God one person believes in, or chooses not to believe in, as the case may be.

Serious problems arise when our imperfect understanding of God, gained through listening more to priests than to God, or our own hearts (led by God) leads us to inevitable actions determined to prove that our belief is better than 'their' belief of some group of opposing thought preists. Or we are forced to 'defend' our religion because we have been convinced by either the priests or those to whom the preists must pay allegiance (such as Kings) that another religion or enemy of God is about to destroy us if we don't. (see GWBush for example).

Accordingly, here is my suggestion for easing our troubled relationship with God:

1. Acknowledge there can be only one Infinite (all powerful) God and that all creation is directly connected with this God. That means You, Me, the family dog, plants, The Earth and those weird looking types down the street and across the boarder.

2. Acknowledge that God is Infinite and you are not, neither is the bloke who believes in Islam over the road or the atheist at work. God is easily able to appear to each of us as we prefer to believe and even stay out of sight as long as the atheist so chooses. This is GOD we're talking about not some bloke with a kindly smile and white flowing beard.

3. Respect everyone you meet as belonging to God - your God - whether he does (believes) as you do, or not.

4. Do NOT force anyone other than yourself to believe as you do, trust me that is NOT what God actually wants - if God DID want that we would all be just exactly alike and without differences.

5. By all means discuss your God with others and see where you agree and where you disagree. I think you will find the areas you actually agree upon will seriously outweigh the areas you don't, Unless you insist upon reinforcing the differences (which will be quite minor in most cases).

6. Forget all that you have been told about God by someone else (including in books or movies) before you read this and just go by what your heart tells you is the right thing to do after reading this. (This most likely will not be all that easy!)

7. Do not hold fast to a belief that separates you irreconcilably from your brother over scriptural observations or religious practice. Do what you feel helps you, let him do what helps him (or her). What works for one does not work for all (once again, we are NOT all exactly alike). If you can observe a solution to a problem your brother faces caused solely by an imperfect understanding by all means engage in discussion with him as to potential ways to overcome the problem/misubnderstanding but grant him the right to do the same with you. None of us are yet perfect

8. Be extremely suspicious of anyone who tries hard to 'convert' you to their way of thinking. Free discussion of pro's and con's is fine but the final decision between you and God should be JUST that, between you and God, no-one else. If someone is a good 'salesman' and pressures you without you being aware you have been pressured, wake up to that. Some people are just damn sneeky and can't help themselves when it comes to exerting a power over you that you really should be in full possession of all by yourself!

9. Some people only seek God at times of extreme vulnerability and uncertainty about the future of their life. Anyone who takes advantage of this for their own purpose should be reviled by the entire community and shunned by all as scavengers of dying meat. Those of spiritual awareness should neutrally support any such individual until they are in a position to think clearly and seek God with a clear and open mind and heart.

10. Do your best at all times to remember that God is Infinite and so is equally Good and Bad. What evil exists, exists because of and through God. Denying evil is to deny God. If you look within yourself and determine that you truly want to do Evil things, it just might be a part of some Grand Plan. WE should not Judge that but trust that God will 'judge' what we do at some stage in our evolution. Man has a long history of doing evil, even under the name of a 'Good' God. if that is the only will you can follow, then so be it**. I trust that there will be sufficient numbers of those who feel the need to do only Good in God's name to maintain sufficient balance within our nature. Christ declared we should do only Good for Evil and that it is better we die of an earth-centred existance for our beliefs than killing our 'brother' for them, that it was evil (not of God's will) to kill.

Seems to me our priests have not reinforced that message strongly or often enough for us or our politicians to get it in the slightest.

That in itself is enough reason for me to point out their shortcomings concerning knowledge of God.

** It should be borne in mind that I am referring to what God is about here. To me, God is the Highest (Spiritual) Authority we can follow as humans. Some human's, on the other hand, insist upon their Authority as being the highest one we should follow and so doing an 'evil' that is contrary to the laws of the land you are in will likely have quite negative consequences for you. It requires strength, courage, honesty and a good deal of self-understanding to decide what is right and what is wrong for you personally, both physically AND spiritually, and doing what you believe is most appropriate in the circumstances.

I would not encourage doing 'evil' (breaking God's or man's laws) but believe there are times when the two are not in harmony (like killing in a 'just' war) and so at those times careful judgement of the issues and decision-making upon what is most right for you personally is required. Often, just doing what you feel like (until your will is in perfect alignment with both God and man (if that is ever possible?) ) will have negative consequences for you.

I do not believe myself enlightened enough yet to fully understand if God 'has a Plan' or if God just set things in motion (along with a set of 'laws' to avoid utter chaos) and is leaving us to work things out as we see fit. (Or if God is a logical consequence of the Universe's evolution of which we form but a minute part?)

I do feel enlightened enough to be able to see the true way to God and God's true nature more clearly than almost any religion or priest and desire that all should gain a better awareness than religion has so far shown itself capable of delivering to them.

Hence the reason for this post.

I hope it made sense to someone other than just myself?

Think About It

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 05:27:14 GMT

Every one of us has at least one thing in common... we prefer being 'right' to being 'wrong'.

That is, even if other's believe that something is 'right' and we believe differently (truly believe so) we will tend to believe that our view is the right one over the possibility of us being 'wrong'.

Unless we make a huge effort of will (not a thing most of us are wiling to do all that often) we will automatically conform our thinking to this tendency so that anything we consciously attend to or observe inherits a definite bias, known as Confirmation Bias, with the result that we give more credence to things that confirm our existing views of 'right and wrong' and reinforce the 'fact' that we are 'right' to think the way we do while denying or diminishing those facts that point to any potential error in our thought/belief.

Any rational observer should be able to see that this could lead to problems and is something we need to take account of and, whenever possible, Avoid!

Sadly, many of us are not even aware of this fact and so remain blissfully ignorant, and therefore likely to be ever-increasingly wrong when we believe ourselves to be 'right'.

One of the most obvious examples of this (in a group setting), and today one of the ones with the greatest consequences for the Human race, is in our belief about 'our' religion. Only slightly less of an example is in the political belief we hold. (Which party we vote for, for those 'fortunate' enough to have a vote).

So become aware that your mind is most likely doing it's best to make you happy by adding weight to what you currently think is 'right' and denying you as much as is possible the ability to take note of things which would mean that you are actually slightly 'wrong' - even when it is very likely that you are in fact incorrect in your belief of the validity of any given thing.

Once you can accept that you may just have a better chance of seeing 'reality' for what it is and not what your brain wants to tell you it is.

If you can do that it increases the chance of elimination of misunderstandings and may even help bring peace into the world (or your world at least).

But it will likely take a long time to improve your current 'reality' (firstly your mind has to overcome your present life's accumulated biases)... and it will take a hell of a lot of effort.

It seems to me that most of the world doesn't think the effort is worth it and it is preferable to just go on being biased and not viewing a more real 'reality'.

With the result that a few of us are so certain that we are 'right' and the World is 'wrong' that we are willing to die to prove it. Even worse some fools take others with them when they do.

That Confirmation Bias sure can be a bitch sometimes.

What We Need To Know...

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:01:40 GMT

Understand this well

What follows is intended as a way to bring all those humans of good Spirit closer together, not to further divide them, by way of revealing just where true evil resides – and it is not in those who follow a different set of beliefs to yourselves, at least not those you have been tricked into believing they are.

Where Man is concerned, “Power Tends to Corrupt and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely”.
- John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton (Lord Acton 1834 –1902),

Here are other words of his Great Wisdom:

“The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.”
“Be not content with the best book; seek sidelights from the others; have no favorites.”
“And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

And finally:

"The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks."

As America has most recently proven to be the True Case – it is all about winning Hearts and Minds of the Populace – particularly by those who wish to remain in a position of Wealth and/or Power.

Power tends to corrupt….

People who come into power may not initially have corrupt motives, but as any observer of history can attest to, it is virtually inevitable that anyone who remains in a position of power for any length of time will grow more and more distant from the realities of those upon whom they depend for their continued reign - making it ever harder to do what is in the majority’s best interests. Society’s where this has not been the case are in extremely short supply throughout history and our current societies are no exception.

It can be argued that many of today’s societies have large numbers of people who, by some measure, could be considered ‘better off’ than previous ancestors. It is Universal, however, that a very tiny minority in those society’s have gained significantly more than those majorities and it is their (the minorities) interests who have been given the highest consideration by those in power. Benefits gained by the majority are an insignificant by-product of the desire by the Ruling Elite to ensure their personal wealth and power continues either unabated or actually manifestly increased.

We should not be fooled by a singular increase in our personal ‘wealth’ that we are the ones for whom our leaders are actually working.

Again, I have no doubt that some in leadership/management positions actually do have altruistic intentions initially and some may manage to hold onto those motivations longer than some others, however, ANYONE who is endowed with power over another sooner or later will succumb to the demands made by that power – moreso when there is little, if anyone, to whom that person must pay an allegiance. Absolute power means that you do not owe anyone allegiance and it is in this case that corruption ultimately becomes absolute.

This applies equally to secular governments as well as to religious organisations.

Democratic leaders try to convince us (win our hearts and minds) by perpetrating the lie that they owe allegiance to those who ‘vote’ for them – that anytime the majority wishes a change in leadership they can vote for someone else.

Where this lie breaks down is in the form of the power that cannot be changed – you can vote for another President or Prime Minister but you cannot change the fact that the President or Prime Minister’s office will have the same powers over you as it had before you voted. You do not actually get to choose who you want to rule you – that is decided by unseen ‘others’ – you just get to pick between the two who have been selected (if you are lucky – some societies only get to ‘choose’ between one candidate/party).

Revolution has been the only effective way a populace is able to make it’s leaders truly accountable and few if any revolutions have ever provided a long term benefit to the majority – they merely replace one corruption for another form.

Religious leaders, while in the main are subject to succumb to similar causes of corruption as their secular counterparts, can also be subject to one other particular corruption: that of the good of the Religion being put ahead of the good of an individual (or group of individuals – even up to the total congregation).

A specific example of this is the treatment of clerics in positions of power who have abused that power (in a sexual way). All too frequently throughout history those in the elite of a Church or Religion have elected to hide such abuse under the carpet rather than cut it out completely. I believe the primary motivation for such corruption is the need to maintain the Faith of the population in the value of the Religion. If it becomes evident to a majority that those in Authority in the Religion do not practice what they preach this could lead to far greater loss to the Religion as a whole than any pain or suffering caused to a relatively few victims of any abuse of power by a (hopefully) limited number of the clergy. The ‘good’ for the many outweighs the ‘good’ for the few.

At the very heart of such corruption lies the desire for leaders to retain their grip on power (and the mechanisms that enforce that power over a majority), even if it means the expense of the sacrifice of other lesser beings.

Just how many wars we know of in today’s world would be initiated or allowed to continue for anywhere near as long if our leaders (Secular or Religious) were the one’s placing their lives at the front instead of those who have little else but their lives to sacrifice? Would Israel remain a flashpoint for the world’s terrorists if the UN meetings were held in Jerusalem instead of 5 000 miles away in the luxury and relative safety of New York? Frankly, I doubt it greatly.

So what is the answer to this corruption?

Primarily it involves awareness. Awareness that power in the hands of a few over the many cannot be trusted to bring the greatest benefit to the greatest number – it will ALWAYS result in a disproportionate benefit to those who lead at the cost of those who actually work (and are then taxed to maintain a bureaucracy).

Once a majority obtains this awareness it is then necessary to determine a form of organisation within such a society that retains order, but at the same time shares wealth equitably, not concentrates it in the control of an elite few. Taking personal responsibility for our actions and determining a set of rules we can all agree to (perhaps based upon Cause and Effect or the consequences of our actions/inactions) are key to providing the harmony and stability necessary for a successful continuity of societal relationships.

Once that can be achieved mankind has the chance to reach it’s true potential.
If it can be spread worldwide it might even manage to achieve Peace and an end to war.

Awareness that our greatest enemy is the enemy within – those who become corrupted by the power they and they alone wield over us and not some fictitious group of people we are told hate us and our way of life - has to be achieved by the majority.

This will be difficult as those in real power contol vast reserves of wealth and power, both legal and military, as well as in the ability to spread their propaganda that ensnares many of us through the rule of ‘Divide and Conquer’ to ensure their power continues unchallenged and unabated in any meaningful way.

Reading this and understanding the truth behind it just may ensure we have a chance.

You have the freedom and liberty to shout "ENOUGH!" (for now at least, but for how much longer?)

Fri, 07 Sep 2007 04:48:54 GMT

How can anyone watching Sydney's collapse into utter military dictatorship and massive denial of freedoms and democracy while preparing for APEC's annual collection of Heads of State, believe that George Bush (for whom all of this is considered 'necessary', if not outright essential), or his crony John Howard, truly believe their pathetic propaganda sound-bites regarding 'liberty' and 'freedom' in a world of 'Democracy'???.

Here's a comment on the subject of how to treat your enemies (like all those rabid anti-globalist demonstrator 'vermin', or the demonic, goodness-killing, Muslim fundamentalists) by one of those George wants us to believe he is hand-in-hand with... one Jesus Christ - the founder of Bush's much-vaunted 'christianity'.

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

...and here's another one of J.C.s most famous quotes ( "It's In the BIBLE PEOPLE!!!" - just look for it for yourselves (hint: Try Matthew, Ch 5):

39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

All you heroes and Bush/Howard followers who want to kill those who challenge you and your fragile beliefs - by all means break God's sixth commandment and do the work of Satan if that is your true belief, but for GOD's sake stop trying to pretend you are 'good' Christians while you do it!

Wake UP Australia!... and in doing so lead the world towards Truth.

APEC Security should be Chased out of Town by the Men in Black Hats (or Long Beards)

Fri, 07 Sep 2007 01:51:18 GMT

Be Afraid Australia - Be Very Afraid.

John Howard and his great friend, the American President who would be world ruler, have done their best to make all Australians afraid - afraid of those demonic, evil, Muslim fundamentalists who we are constantly brainwashed into believing want to destroy all freedom and western beliefs and liberties (If you want to see liberty in action look at downtown Sydney - and not a real fundamentalist in sight).

So afraid in fact that we will think nothing of spending $150 million for super over-the-top- beefed up security to protect the American leader (just how much security does Russia or China's leader demand while here?)

So afraid they hope we will not notice when that security is made to look completly pointless when an unauthorised group can get within ten metres of the President's hotel with three vehicles that were not inspected for anything like, say, a great big bomb! Fortunately for everyone concerned the bomb they chose to deliver was the publicity one that destroyed any credibility Johnny or George have in perpetuating this massive fraud on the suckers who are paying for all this - the US and Aus tax-paying, Muslim-fearing public.

To all you denigrators of this joke out there take a good long hard look at what a farce this security cordon actually is - and thank the Chaser for proving it to your irrational fear-blinded faces.

Virtue can only get you so much

Wed, 05 Sep 2007 04:33:26 GMT

One of the greatest truths and finest realisations Religion has ever revealed to Man is that 'Virtue Is it's Own Reward'.

It is therefore more than a little hypocritical of them to recognise that the rewards thusly obtained are insufficient to send missionaries on nice overseas holidays to ensure the word of Their God gets spread to all and sundry or to build the massively over the top and ornate 'Homes of God' ( not to mention their own slightly less ornate homes like say, The Vatican) as befits the leaders of a group of millions and that therefore it was necessary to pass the collection plate around for the poorer people to give what they could and to ensure that on their deathbeds the servants of Mammon (massive wealth) handed over portions of estates to the church who could ensure the salvation of their eternal soul.

In other words, being virtuous can only get you so far then ya gotta hustle some money!

The logical conclusion of which is anyone who hustles better and more than you do controls more than you can - if you wanna be the best ya gotta hustle the most. If at all possible enter into a cartel - assuming you can trust those who enter into it with you.

Problem! It becomes fairly easy to spot the bastards who have control over you and resentment, ultimately ending in violent revolution to overturn those in power, results.

Solution? Get as many of the little people as you can to hustle just like you are doing then what you are doing becomes ever harder to spot. Thus was the reasoning that created the Advertising Company.

Be virtuous ( if you can).

Accept that those who can't will want to turn you into one of them to make themselves feel better about their lack.

KNOW that you are better than that and deserve more than what they choose for their selfish selves.

Spread the word to as many others as you can in as many ways as you can.

(the word being that materialism is a very poor and unsustainable substitute for personal moral growth)

If you have a differing view I should like to hear it.

Why I HATE computers

Wed, 29 Aug 2007 05:38:36 GMT

1. I don't do backups.

2. They sometimes crash - fatally! (the first time this happened to me in twenty years of computing was using the 'new-improved' Windows Vista)

3. Some support guys are stupid brain-dead overworked jerks who either cannot read a customer's instructions or don't have the time to.

4. Bill Bloody Gates and Micro - lets make it even MORE complicated - soft!

5. The little bastards are doing things you don't know about behind your back - at least those using Windows XP and Vista are!

Law and Justice in Austrtalia

Thu, 02 Aug 2007 05:55:43 GMT

In case any readers should form the opinion that i am biased against American Justice (or America in general) by reason of my most recent (and a couple of not so recent) posts I would like to explain my view of Australian 'Justice', as most recently espoused in the Dr Mohammed Haneef 'terrorist' case.

The case against Dr Haneef was dropped (after he had spent almost two weeks being held against his will and interrogated without charge by Aussie 'Law') after the Australian Federal Police's case was shown to be pathetically inadequate, not to mention almost criminally inept, false and flawed.

This is not surprising since it was based almost entirely upon guilt by association ( Fact: the Glasgow 'suicide' bomber was his cousin - son of his dead father's brother. Second Fact: he had a 'close' relationship with the bomber's brother in that he gave him a mobile phone which still had an unexpired contract period left when he (Haneef) was leaving the UK in July 2006 to take up a job in a hospital in Queensland, Australia).

What i find almost as intollerable as the incarceration without trial or (fair) charge is the disgusting way both the Senior Officer of the AFP, Mick Keelty, as well as the Minister of Immigration, Kevin Andrews, have abused any semblance of decency and fair play - not to mention True Justice in their dishonesty and manipulation of the 'truth' in their dealings with the Australian Public and media over this issue.

In support of my claim i provide the following for consideration and comparison.

Mick Keelty: "For all that's been said about the SIM card, the SIM card is still in the vicinity of London at the time that the devices were attempted to be exploded," he told journalists. "The SIM card is still at Glasgow, at the airport, at the time that the attempted bombing happened there."

Fact: The Sim Card was located 300 miles from Glasgow in Liverpool at the time of the actual (not attempted - the geek can't even tell the difference between an attempt and an actual attack) bombing!

(Liverpool is roughly half way between London and Glasgow and is where Haneef's second cousin was living and where Haneef had once lived, although not concurrently with his second cousin, when the card and phone were given to him to use up what was left of Haneef's phone contract)

A pathetic attempt to cover Keelty's incompetance was made when it was suggested that what he REALLY meant to say was people ASSOCIATED with the SIM card were in the vicinity's of both attacks.

Clearly he is under too much pressure to correctly perform his job let alone be able to say what he 'means' to the press. The words he actually said would undoubtedly prejudice most Australians who heard and believed him against the alleged 'terrorist' doctor.

Keelty is not alone in the AFP in terms of being under too much (Political - Liberal Government) pressure to perform their jobs 'correctly' (they are doing EXACTLY what the Liberal Government wants them to do - demonise Haneef)...

An AFP affidavit supplied to the court trying to charge Haneef with his 'crime' states: "On 2 July and 3 July 2007 Dr Haneef participated in a taped record of interview with the AFP and stated the following: Whilst in the UK he resided with suspects 1 and 2 (alleged suicide bomber Kafeel Ahmed and his brother Dr Sabeel Ahmed), at 13 Bentley Road, Liverpool."

However, in the record of interview, obtained by The Australian on Tuesday, Dr Haneef tells police that he lived at 13 Bentley Road, Liverpool, with several doctors, whom he names.

None are the two suspects.

It is known that Sabeel Ahmed did reside at the same address but AFTER Haneef himself left it - it is a boarding house and as Haneef was moving to Queensland, no doubt Sabeel also took over his second cousin's apartment while being given the mobile phone to use up.

Should this be considered giving support to terrorism as the AFP want us to believe? Or is it a case of a migrant cleaning up his affairs with support for members of his family before leaving the country, as any one of us would do in the same circumstances?

Perhaps the most damning piece of evidence Against the AFP concerns what they had to say concerning Dr Haneef's attempt to leave Australia under 'suspicious' circumstances (His wife had recently given birth to a new daughter by emergency caesarean section and, as their custom dictates in such circumstances, was living with her family at their family home in Bangalore. India.

The police affidavit asserts that Dr Haneef, 27, a Gold Coast Hospital registrar since September last year, "had no explanation as to why he did not have a return ticket" from India to Australia.

"Dr Haneef, whose wife, Firdous Arshiya, gave birth to their first child by emergency caesarean section on June 26 in Bangalore, India, was trying to leave Australia on July 2 on a one-way ticket bought the same day by his father-in-law in India.

While the police affidavit stated Dr Haneef "had no explanation" about his one-way ticket, the record of interview shows that he gave a detailed explanation to police while answering questions.

Dr Haneef told police that as he did not have funds in his Australian bank account his father-in-law had booked and paid for the one-way ticket with an understanding that "when I go there we can arrange for the coming back ticket. Because I just got 7 days' leave approved".

The final nail in the coffin of any semblance of accuracy or intelligence existing in the Keystone Kops AFP's case was actually the first and primary blunder in the affidavit trying to charge Haneef with supporting terrorism... they attempted to get a Judge to believe that Haneef's former SIM card was located in the jeep used to blow up Glasgow Airport's entrance hall.. it was found, as almost all people concerned knew well before the affidavit was written up, in Liverpool with the man to whom it was given over a year before by Haneef.... as any one of us would have done were we about to leave the country for a new job half-way around the world.

Haneef's only crime (yet in any way 'proven') is to have a second cousin who was deranged enough to want to blow himself up in a jeep in Glasgow.

The desperation of the Howard government to want to hold onto power in the forthcoming federal election by whipping up enough redneck ill-informed frenzy over terrorist/xenophobist hysteria via manipulation of a federal agency's toying with the truth should by now be a well-worn and fmailiar tune - not to mention a highly successful one thanks to modern media and the constant demonisation of an 'enemy' we should all be meant to 'fear' and whom only the likes of George W Bush and John W Howard and formerly Tony Blair can save us all from (while ensuring their own aggradisment and personal power and glory).

It is time we started to Wake UP Australia!

Law and Justice... for some.

Thu, 02 Aug 2007 04:48:06 GMT

Again, in the interests of fair play, i have to report that America, courtesy of one particular judge, has partially redeemed itself in terms of it's apparent corrupt ways by ensuring that Paris Hilton was not allowed to flaunt justice because of her Grandfathers, parents and indeed even her own ludicrously obtained wealth and position in society's ladder, and was forced against her and her legal team's will to submit to the 'full' 23 day jail sentence imposed because of her disregard for state driving laws. ( Not to mention her drunken disregard for the police who arrested her as displayed recently on Australian prime time TV.

Well done Judge! Nice try's Paris - loser.

I stand partially corrected... and honestly amazed.

Law but where's the Justice?

Fri, 08 Jun 2007 03:24:35 GMT

So Paris is out of Jail after 3 and a bit days (but gets five days 'credit').

Effectively her 45 day jail sentence, that was commuted into a half sentence for time off for good behaviour before she even entered the prison, has been reinstated but as home detention (she has to wear an ankle bracelet 'tag' and it's not even from Rodeo Drive's jewellery stores, shock! horror!) minus five days for the three and a bit days she actually spent inside a 'real' prison - albeit one for special people with special needs (read the Rich and Infamous). This is LA LA Land we're talking about,after all.

'Undisclosed Medical Reasons' is the official reason issued by the Sherriff's Department for letting Paris out of jail 'almost free'. There is no proof that those medical reasons were actually all her jailers being totally sick and tired of her endless whining about the inhuman treatment she was forced to endure for those three days - she wasn't even allowed room service for pete's sakes! It was either she goes or they would!

If EVER there was any doubt that there is one law for the rich and one for the rest of us, or that the American Justice and Legal system is completely up for sale and that money really pulls the puppet strings before, this case ends completely any and all 'doubt'.

How America can have the balls to pretend that they can dictate to any other country what they should or should not do on the basis of some morally Higher Ground is a never-ending source of wonderment for me.

Guantanamo and the Paris Hilton destroy ANY credibility as a moral nation they might once have fooled people into believing they had.

All societies are corrupt - it is just a matter of how well you try and hide it - America is losing it's ability to keep it's corruption under the mat.

At last.

Law for All and Justice for None.

Mon, 14 May 2007 06:33:58 GMT

The Saga of Pan Pharmaceuticals comes to a near close.

A New South Wales judge ordered two counts brought before the court concerning Pan's owner, Mr Jim Selim, be acquitted without trial because she believed the crown had not proven that Mr Selim would have definitely known beforehand that destroying certain data pertaining to the drug 'Travacalm' was illegal because it would have been used in a federal trial against him. ( Even though the TGA were investigating his office records for irrecularities at the time).

Mr Selim was being tried on the charge of ordering one of his employees to destroy computer files ( which the employee admits to doing) so as to prevent a federal case being brought against him relating to the atrociously poor quality control and record-keeping concerning manufacture of drugs being sold to the Australian public (as well as exported overseas).

Mr Selim was not found in any way 'innocent' of the charges - how can you ever seriously know what someone does or doesn't know if acting on the 'knowledge' would be considered 'illegal' and the person suspected of knowing was careful about being found out?

Not being able to prove that someone 'ordered' an employee to destroy data that that person knew, in advance, would be used in a federal court case against them means just that - it could not be proven beyond doubt - it by no means means he did not commit any such action.

The data was destroyed - it would have been evidence that could have been used in a federal trial against the company and senior management. Proving that Mr Selim actually knew this was the problem - not the 'uncertainty of guilt' concerning the act itself.

As for Pan - the TGA were investigating Pan for serious breaches of our health laws for at LEAST three months BEFORE they finally ordered Pan's products be recalled because Pan had not ensured sufficient data was being kept to show that the drugs they were selling to us were either safe or of sufficiently uniform quality (one particular pack of tablets was found to have tablets with as little as NO active ingredient while others in the same pack had over 7 times the amount stated as being on the pack!!! - you might consider this 'reasonable' in the drugs you take, but frankly that sort of 'quality' frightens the hell out of me!

Since Pan had to enter into voluntary liquidation following the 'scare' concerning their products' almost total recall, they are no longer producing such potentially useless (0% of active ingredient) or lethal pills ( 700% of active ingredient) therefore there is little point in taking them to court for regulatory breaches.

Mr Selim has had charges against him dropped because the police could not provide sufficient evidence of the charge he was accused of, according to one judge, for that trial to procede.

Australians will no longer be at risk because of Mr Selim's shoddy manufacturing processes, the truth of which are no longer being challenged, mostly because the products have ceased being manufactured by Mr Selim and Pan Pharmaceuticals and the almost total abscence of required processing data.

Footnote: Mr Selim is currently seeking $141 million in damages from the TGA. We wait ansd see the outcome of his case - I'm betting he won't be able to make a strong enough case in court either.

I wonder if He and his masses of 'supporters' will recognise that as 'proof' of the Innocence of the TGA in this matter?

Stem cells and 'The Right To Life'

Fri, 04 May 2007 05:28:09 GMT

Here's one for all those convinced that it is wrong for scientists to experiment with stem cells to think about.

God so cares for his human creations that he ensures all women (but for a few faulty mutations that he obviously wants to be allowed to live and exist as 'human' beings as He is All Powerful) create and then utterly wipe from the face of the Earth (and out of their bodies) the germ of a new human being, in it's egg form, not once in their lives - not twice or even three times - but once every single month for almost 40 years, on average. That's 500 potential human lives flushed down the toilet - the only one's 'saved' are those with whom a male human sperm comes into contact with and which then successfully negotiates the danger strewn, nine-month, death defying process of embryolisation and birth. Typically this is between two and three out of the five hundred human eggs per non-sterile female in our 'enlightened' western society.

Let me restate that in terms more easily understood. Within our lifetimes, in Australia alone, over 5 BILLION potential human lives will literally be flushed down the toilet - according to God's perfect plan.

Now tell me that stem cell research is wrong because it is against God's will, you jerks.

Speaking of Jerks that reminds me - the five billion potential human lives flushed is but a ridiculously small fraction of the lives lost through the male habit of shooting five billion sperm cells (the male half of the birth equation) every time he cums when only one ever usually gets a shot at real life (assuming at the time he is with and stays inside his partner and is not wearing a condom, etc).

Make no mistake here - i'm not talking about destroying embryo's that a woman or a couple have decided will be kept in cryogenic limbo if and until they ever become ready to have 7 kids before throwing away the unwanted ones. I'm referring to exactly the same human eggs that end up in our sewers every single day which can instead be used to save and improve human life suffering by means of an ingenious man-made method (nothing to do with 'God' made human conception)

Sucking out an ovum's dna and replacing it with dna from a non-sex cell does NOT create a human embryo - it creates a cell production factory that is totally artificial - it just uses humanlike cells and processes.

Got That?

Now get Over it and go back to doing what you do best - restricting your own tiny little minds growth.

Short-sightedness

Fri, 04 May 2007 02:41:45 GMT

Politicians have a very specific myopia - they can't see past the ends of their lobbyists!

A Short Novel (Part I)

Sat, 07 Apr 2007 05:03:39 GMT

LIFE? - DON'T TALK TO ME ABOUT LIFE!

Bob was a bipedal mammal. He was also unhappy. What was making him unhappy was that he lived on a planet called Earth. This of itself did not make him unhappy; what made him unhappy was that Earth was also populated by a very great many other mammals, most of whom Bob would never get to meet much less know, and that most of these mammals were, in his opinion, Morons!

Something else made Bob unhappy - a very particular thing - but we will come back to that later.

Bob had a brain. This did not make him particularly different or special amongst his species. What made him special was that he used it - or rather the WAY in which he used it. He actually thought about things, a very great many things, but mostly about how nice it would be if things his kind did, they either did better (ie. with just a tiny bit of courtesy for others and/or common sense) or just didn't do at ALL.

Things like parking your shopping trolley next to the person you are chatting to in the Condiments aisle of the supermarket, thus blocking anyone from passing you. Or things like ignoring your dog while he yaps/barks constantly outside your neighbour's bedroom/kitchen/loungeroom open window. Or things like walking into a place where people are praying to a God they believe in and opening fire with a sub-machine gun with the belief that you are doing your God's 'holy work', especially when the two God's are actually the SAME God and it is just the stupidity of previous 'prohets' differing idea's about God that has lead to the belief that 'my' God is better than 'your' God, so I am holier than thou, so take This! Or things like dropping a bomb on a restaurant where army intelligence ( I know, I know - don't get me started on That oxymoron) tells you the leader of some 'revolutionary' terrorist group is having a meal (along with fourteen 'innocent' civilians) and then claiming that you did this to prevent terrorism in the world, only to find you just murdered fourteen hungry people and the leader is happily driving aound looking for 'political dissidents intent on overthrowing the glorious leader of the Peoples Democratic Republic' - Oh Please! Pass me the air-sick bag - I'm going to lunch up-chuck.

Many things! Many, many things in fact! Many, many things indeed. Bob thought about all of them at some point or other. Sometimes it would make him angry - mad even. So mad he often shouted. Shouted at the sheer stupidity and injustice of it all. Occasionally he would rant a bit too. This kind of made Bob feel a little better afterwards but did not make Bob all that popular.

Bob was able to justify this with the fact that there were not that many members of the society he lived in that he wished to be popular with!... and so lived a fairly solitary existance, finding that there were very few people he could share his opinions with who then were willling to stick around long enough for them to create a friendship. Still, in the main, this seemed to work out to most people's advantage.

It would have been ideal in fact, were it not for one minor problem. Bob quite liked discussing things with someone. Someone else. He had tried discussing them with himself but found this to be less than illumenating since he already knew what he was going to say and seldom had anything useful to add. Someone who had the intelligence to both agree with him or correct him if he had 'missed' something important. Preferably someone who agreed with him! Furthermore, he quite liked the idea of having a special someone with whom he could share more than just idea's but also feelings... and the occasional day off... or weekend away... or six month South Pacific cruise, with! Someone with whom he was also able to exercise his not inconsiderable capacity to empathise with - to sympathise with - to care for and be considerate of - to show kindness to - and if at all possible - to Bonk! But more of that later.

Previous efforts to share his thoughts, and occasionally a house, with other members of his community had met with varying degrees of success and had left the occasional fairly indellible impression on our Bob. All had in some way added to the quantity of data he had gathered with which he formed his various opinions and ideas on Life, which then coalesced into sort of lumpy, rough, unfinished Truths against which later 'revelations' involving the 'masses' were smashed or disassembled to see how they might fit into the scheme of things and where Bob's place in life actually was - or he thought it should be.

Generally, Bob felt it should be somewhwere pretty much close to the 'top' or at any rate a damn site further up than many of the morons he read about or saw or heard on the box-like things called either the TeeVee or Ray-dio.

Sadly, Bob was aware, there was at least one major reason why he was not 'up where he belonged' and this in part was adding to his unhappiness.

He was, at heart, basically a lazy sod.

Actually this was not quite entirely true... Bob could on occasion be quite industrious and could spend hours or days working away to achieve some goal - often putting more effort into his labours than many others might see the need for and perhaps even causing unnecessary amounts of work for himself in the process when simpler methods to achieve the same result may have been known to himself and plain to see by others. He could be dutiful and conscientious when working for others but could also feel a need to 'get away' with things just like most of the people he believed himself to be better than, and would rationalise away any guilt at geting something for nothing with the certain knowledge that he was not being paid what he was truly 'worth'.

Where Bob often came up short was in his choice of activity. He found that he favoured fairly unproductive but 'involving' activities to which he would donate fairly vast amounts of his time for relatively infinitesimal return. Things like playing Tetris. Or watching crap Teevee. Or sleeping. Or lying down and just 'contemplating' without ever coming to a half-decent conclusion then acting on it.

If it were not for this fairly major drawback Bob may have become ruler of the planet by now. Not that he was stupid enough to actually want to be such a figurehead anyway. Bob was way wiser than that. Ruler's have a way of being both target and puppet of powerful people and Bob had no desire to be either of the former but could stand the idea of being one of the latter, less 'obvious' powerbrokers. Providing he could retain his independence. Bob was not a huge fan of the idea of having to compromise with others - especially others he knew he would be foolish to trust - ie. people who wanted as much control over life as he did...

To Be Continued...

Love

Fri, 06 Apr 2007 13:54:00 GMT

LOVE

If you Love your Family, but not every member of the Family of Man – You know not Love.

If you Love your Pet, but not the dog that barks next door – You know not Love.

If you Love the beautiful face, but not the old crone – you know not Love.

If you Love your home and yet enforce barriers to keep those without a home from it – you know not Love.

If you Love your sporting team but not the Umpires or the fans of the opposing side – You know not Love.

If you Love that little luxury in life but keep it for your own and do not share it with one who suffers – you know not Love.

If you Love your wealth and store it up without using it to do good – You know not Love.

If you show favour to those with fortune yet reject those who’s fortunes have fallen – you know not Love

To be one who truly Loves you must not show discrimination to race, colour or creed.

To be one who Loves it is necessary to oppose only actions – not the people who take those actions.(for reasons you may be unable to fully comprehend)

To be one who Loves it is necessary to remember that all mankind has a heart and a brain as do you;

that anyone may have a child that is Loved as much as is your own;

that they are undoubtedly someone’s son or daughter, brother or sister, mother or father;

that their way of living, however foreign, is as precious to them as yours is to you;

and their life is equally as valuable as your own.

In short, if you cannot give to those unlike you, that which you would give to those of your own ‘kind’, You have not True Love in your Heart.

Judgement day

Fri, 30 Mar 2007 05:39:57 GMT

I am among the first to roll the eyes, throw up my hands, and cry out " What are those idiots thinking of - are they really on the same planet as me?" whenver i see yet another ludicrously insignificant (to the perpetrator) 'punishment' meted out by a namby-pamby, out-of-touch Wuss of a judge or magistrate in Australian courts for a crime that has had massive effects on it's victim(s).

So in the interests of fairness i guess it is also beholden upon me to comment on those seemingly much rarer occasions when a judge or magistrate actually seems to be the only one showing an ounce of intelligence and 'reality' in a situation.

The case i have in mind is the no-doubt widely seen debacle between a father/swimming coach and his Young Adult daughter/swimmer at the World Swimming Championships, being held in Melbourne at the moment.

If, like me, you witnessed the TV footage and thought that Dad , while 'losing' it a little, got a decidedly hard deal by the media who were basically putting all the fault for the attacking going on down to him and him alone, and that he got an even harder deal by an over-enthusiastic and unbalanced police force who placed a temporary restraining order on Dad refusing to let him within 200 m of his daughter or allowing him to even telephone her, seemingly forgetting that he is (was) her coach and his daughter is a swimmer competing in the games.

Well I am happy to report that when the case was brought before a Melbourne court this week the judge threw it out and determined that the father had no case to answer and that the restraining order be lifted immediately (Dad and daughter, who looked incredibly embarrased by the fuss everyone had made on her 'behalf' got into a taxi together after the hearing).

The Judge obviously saw the issue the same as i did - one of a protective and caring father reaching a point of utter frustration with his daughter's 'attitude' and refusal to discuss important issues to both her AND her father in anything like a satisfactory manner and losing the ability to remain calm and rational himself, particularly when a 19 year old starts throwing fists at you.

I am not a sports physiologist such as the ones who attend football tribunals and explain why players are not really doing what it looks like they are doing to the camera's view, but are actually protecting themselves or were just attempting to punch the ball and not the guy opposing him in the balls but i believe that any good sports physiologist who analyses the video of the 'attack' will point out that what looked to some like a man hitting a smaller woman was, in fact, a man trying to prevent the woman from landing some telling blows on him.

Anyway, to a Judge who was able to display intelligent common-sense when everyone else was clearly not, I Salute You.

Now, if you could just have a word or six with some of your contemporaries...

Troubled waters - Some Facts to clarify the Iranian issue

Thu, 29 Mar 2007 06:57:51 GMT

Once again governmental propaganda seems to be leading the reporting of international news rather than intelligent and unbiased journalism.

The issue this time? Those evil Muslim (who else?) Iranians who have illegally kidnapped those brave, loyal UK marines who were only doing their duty in 'Iraqi' waters.

That they are brave and loyal UK armed services personnel is not in any doubt. What is considerably more dubious is where exactly they were and what rights Iran had to 'kidnap' them. (No-one is at war with Iran, per se, so they are hardly prisoners of war, neither are they illegal combatants, as the unfortunate David Hicks was determined to be by the invading American Army and their coalition of desperately-hopeful trading partners.

I personally feel it likely that Iran captured these armed personnel, who were in rapidly mobile amphibious craft at the time, (that i would have considered extremely difficult to overpower) purely to gain some bargaining 'chips' and badly needed moral support from their fellow arab countries in the region. In the looming conflict between Iran and the world (via the US) over Iran's efforts to put them on somewhere near the same nuclear level as their enemies, who have a less than ideal reputation in the area as a 'friendly' force just at the present moment. (For those who do not remember, America have had a deep and dark mutual antagonism with Iran since Ayotollah Khomeni presided over the return of Iran to an Islamist state back in the mid 70's and held over 300 US embassy and military hostages in Tehran for a considerable time under a potential threat of a similar kind of trial Hicks has been graciously awarded but with death by beheading the likely outcome rather than being returned to the US to serve out the rest of their 'sentences').

But that is just my personal feeling.

I want to make the relevant FACTS a hell of a lot clearer than the UK, US and 'allied' governments, such as my own, are endeavouring to do. Or their seeming puppet-like members of the mass media do. (or maybe they're just incompetent? or am I being a little unfair and it is their editors who refuse to see any benefit in publishing unbiased factual information anymore and so delete any useful facts that do not help to inflame people's paper-buying, TV-rating passions?)

SO, to the actual facts.

The following image makes the 'picture' a little clearer, vis-a-vis just who's waters are who's and why BOTH Iran and the UK might consider themselves to be in the 'right'.

Gif Image: Persian Gulf.

Iraq is shown here as 'Mesopotamia' and Iran as 'Khuzestan'

The distance between the two Iraqi boarders varies between 10-15 nautical miles

Iraq's entire coastline has a maximum width, facing the Persian Gulf, of around 20 Kms (a fraction over 12 nautical miles). It does however, because of the nature of the coastline, have an iinland measured extent of some 60 kms, the vast majority of which is facing Kuwait on the other side of a branch of the Euphrates River delta.

The problem is of course, not with the Kuwaiti side of the watery border but some 20 kms or so further to the east. The Kanal-e-Ruka forms the Iran-Iraq Border and it is at it's mouth (the Kanal is one of the Tigris River delta waterways) where the region of indeterminacy lies.

The above map seems to give Iraq a greater than 'equal' share of the waters near the mouth of the Kanal-e-Ruka, showing the 'boarder' to closely follow Iran's side of the coast rather than, as might be expected by fair minded people, to extend out from the coast at 90 degrees to the entry point of the tributary to the Gulf, thus giving both countries 'half' of the gulf waters near their coastlines.

Iraq might feel (and indeed Saddam mouthpieces used this as one 'justification' for his invasion of Kuwait in the early 90's) that for a country of it's size (and vast oil wealth) that some 20 km's of Gulf coastline insufficiently reflects it's status and 'needs' as a nation, and so expect that Iran should take much less of the waters close to Iraq as they have already some one-third of the Gulf's total shoreline, but international law on a country's claim to the disputed regions of international waters leaves a lot to be desired.

There are currently a number of different internationally accepted regions that any one country can lay claim to as the following chart shows.

Sea Boundaries.

As of the late 20th century most countries have adopted a 12 nautical mile (1 NM = 1.85 Km) territorial zone. It is here that the difficulty lies. Under international maritime law a country is entitled to exercise control of their territorial waters (both Iran and Iraq, as well as Kuwait, have adopted the 12 n mile limit while Iran and Kuwait also lay claim to a further 12 n mile 'contiguous zone'. So all of the Gulf waters that Iraq can legally lay claim to are completely absorbed within both Iran and Kuwait's extended 24 n mile limit from their own country's shorelines.

Hence the 'correct boundaries' for all three states must be established by mutual agreement, not one country's arbitrary declaration, or otherwise we have a ludicrous situation, ripe for international incident, in a region where war is being raged continually, even today, and much military and naval operations are being performed by countries who have no actual claim to the waters.

Saddam and Iran were the bitterest of enemies since before the 8 year long war (1980 - 88)between the two country's (where the US was clearly happy to give Saddam as much help and weapons as possible to defeat his enemies, be they on the Iranian side of the boarder or on his own side, and it was the Iranian's who were the evil despots and terrorists, not the US ally Saddam. Dick Cheyney was happy to meet Saddam and trade munitions with him for money and oil assurances - the Iraqi Kurds were gassed around the time of one of his visits using Bell helicopters Dick took credit for helping to arrange for the US to supply) It is unlikely that any mutually agreed to settlement of territorial waters has existed for more than 30 years and especially not between Iran and the newly US-created government of Iraq.

Hence Iran has every right to defend itself from armed personnel in waters they have an entitlement to claim, where those personnel did not first seek and acquire Iranian approval In much the same way we would expect US coalition forces would expect the same rights when they are operating in what they believe to be Iraqi waters while 'assisting' the Iraqi government.

All those who take up arms on disputed territorial waters should be prepared to accept the consequences and not become complacent or cocky that they have exclusive right to operate by right of the arms they carry. Sometimes someone can come along with an even bigger 'stick'.

Photo Album: The Garden

Thu, 15 Nov 2007 16:43:59 GMT

The Garden

Blue Iris

Blue Rose

Tulips

Epiphyllum Jennifer Ann

Hibiscus en Glass

Lilium

Blog list: Blogs worth a visit

Sat, 06 Oct 2007 07:01:03 GMT

Blogs worth a visit

Frost Byte
There is more in India than Just Tele-centre Drones!
Fyst_Mage
Web-home of a kindred spirit.
Lovewillbringustogether
Lover of Wisdom

Custom List: Have Your Say...

Sat, 21 Oct 2006 09:59:18 GMT

Have Your Say...

On-line Forum
Something on your mind? Like to share it with the world? Sign inand shout it out l o u d!