tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26118982603640078512024-03-08T00:37:07.536-08:00Huffington Post Free SpeechRed Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.comBlogger214125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-48487660028948813262011-10-24T15:22:00.001-07:002011-10-24T15:22:11.715-07:00Weaknesses In Power Systems Spark Fear Of Science Fiction-Style Hack Sabotage<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/383874/thumbs/s-POWER-SYSTEMS-HACKS-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/383874/thumbs/s-POWER-SYSTEMS-HACKS-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>So typical of the US military industrial complex. First they create a virus and use it against an enemy. Then they start raising the fear that the weapon we created might be used against us. Once again the arms race escalates and a whole new industry of fear and destructio<wbr/>­n is born.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/23/power-systems-hack_n_1027132.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-17825459686092741172011-10-18T09:03:00.001-07:002011-10-18T09:03:57.285-07:00David Axelrod: 'Ask Osama Bin Laden' If Obama Was Prepared As President (VIDEO)<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/379636/thumbs/s-DAVID-AXELROD-OBAMA-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/379636/thumbs/s-DAVID-AXELROD-OBAMA-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>So your argument that Obama may not have been ready to be president but grew into the role is that Bush was so incompeten<wbr/>­t that he let 9/11 happen? Huh?<br /><br /><br /><br />In fact Obama hit the ground running as much as any president in recent history. The auto industry was collapsing just as he entered office and he managed to save it and unlike Bush's TARP mess did it in a way that ended up getting tax payer money back with interest.<br /><br /><br /><br />Getting back to Bush he was incompeten<wbr/>­t from the beginning to the end. Read the new book The Elenth Day about 9/11. The Bush administra<wbr/>­tion missed countless red flags about the impending attack and on the day of the attack the chain of command was broken.<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/barack-obama-2012">Barack Obama 2012</a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/18/david-axelrod-obama-osama-bin-laden_n_1017539.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-51464779729702146402011-10-16T07:27:00.001-07:002011-10-16T07:27:16.001-07:00Saudi Arabia's Appropriate Response to Iran's Assassination PlotI don't see a world ban on Iran's oil ever happening. The demand for oil is too great. <br /><br /><br /><br />Regarding the threat of war: Even if it is proven that this plot had approval at the highest level of Iran's government (something I'm not convinced of yet) I don't see war as an appropriat<wbr/>­e response. The idea that you should punish thousands (probably hundreds of thousands) of innocent Iranians for the idiocy of a government that they voted out anyway but that retained power against the will of its people is absurd.<br /><br /><br /><br />Besides there is plenty of precedent for turning a blind eye to government involvemen<wbr/>­t in conspiraci<wbr/>­es. I just finished the book the Eleventh Day by Anthony Summers. He provides indisputab<wbr/>­le evidence that some people in the Saudi government helped make 9/11 happen and that the Bush administra<wbr/>­tion knew about that and covered it up. <br /><br /><br /><br />Finally, I don't agree that other sanctions won't work. They take longer and don't provide the wargasm that so many chickenhaw<wbr/>­ks in the US media demand but can eventually be very effective.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raymond-j-learsy/saudi-arabias-appropriate_b_1013783.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-414170930151218392011-09-16T13:05:00.001-07:002011-09-16T13:05:29.976-07:00Bill O'Reilly, Liz Cheney Argue Over Iraq (VIDEO)<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/353279/thumbs/s-OREILLY-CHENEY-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/353279/thumbs/s-OREILLY-CHENEY-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>Just a reminder folks: its well documented that pulling down that statue was a psy-ops organizati<wbr/>­on orchestrat<wbr/>­ed by the US military. <br /><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89489923" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www<wbr/>­.npr.org/t<wbr/>­emplates/s<wbr/>­tory/story<wbr/>­.php?story<wbr/>­Id=8948992<wbr/>­3</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2637" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www<wbr/>­.fair.org/<wbr/>­index.php?<wbr/>­page=2637</a><br /><br /><br /><br />This is such typical right wing propaganda<wbr/>­. Keep repeating a lie even after its been shown to be a lie.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/16/bill-oreilly-liz-cheney-iraq_n_965917.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-72190529337615354712011-09-14T20:21:00.001-07:002011-09-14T20:21:59.565-07:00The Palestinians' UN Remains of the DayIts impossible to have a reasonable debate about Israel on this site<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/hamas">Hamas</a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amb-marc-ginsberg/the-palestinians-un-remai_b_962649.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-46307946157220679922011-09-10T14:35:00.001-07:002011-09-10T14:35:21.885-07:00Saturn In Front Of The Sun: Cassini Spacecraft Captures Breathtaking View Of Ringed Planet (PHOTO)<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/348041/thumbs/s-SATURN-PHOTO-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/348041/thumbs/s-SATURN-PHOTO-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>That's because you don't live in the middle east. The US has been causing coups, supporting tyranney, waging war for decades. Al Queda kills a few thousand innocent civilians. The US kills millions.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/John_Larrimore/saturn-in-front-of-the-sun-cassini-photo_n_955659_107304042.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-83520346861160839152011-09-07T06:32:00.001-07:002011-09-07T06:32:59.071-07:00Was There an Alternative?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/200029/thumbs/s-BIN-LADEN-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/200029/thumbs/s-BIN-LADEN-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>I would go one step further. If Gore were president 9/11 wouldn't have happened in the first place. There were plenty of opportunit<wbr/>­ies for the FBI to catch these guys and the outgoing Clinton administra<wbr/>­tion told Bush that the #1 security priority should be Bin Laden. But the Bush people were interested in things like missile defense and they also had a reflexive reaction to ignore any advise from Clinton. A Gore administra<wbr/>­tion would have almost certainly caught most if not all of the terrorists before they had a chance to put their plan in action.<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/mostpopular">Most Popular</a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/noam-chomsky/was-there-an-alternative-_b_950216.html?ir=Books">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-27161082280602796942011-08-06T09:33:00.001-07:002011-08-06T09:33:21.022-07:00Just Words<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/323483/thumbs/s-LANGUAGE-PSYCHOTHERAPY-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/323483/thumbs/s-LANGUAGE-PSYCHOTHERAPY-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>Its amazing that people still refer to Freud as if he had any scientific validity. I think Freud was a great thinker because he raised questions that no one had raised before. But his theories of the mind have as much validity as astrology. Freud has been used as literally a case study in theories that are pseudo-sci<wbr/>­ence -- unprovable by any data and hence having no scientific validity. Any decent psychologi<wbr/>­st or psychiatri<wbr/>­st who understand<wbr/>­s science will tell you that Freud is useless to achieve a real understand<wbr/>­ing of the human mind and relevant these days for historical issues only. Yet, so many people still study and use his theories. I guess I shouldn't let that depress me, after all people are still consulting astrologer<wbr/>­s too.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-g-goldberg-phd/just-words_b_904138.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-6624076532844680232011-07-24T17:51:00.001-07:002011-07-24T17:51:39.086-07:00Why Religion Is Better Than Secular Ethics for Human Rights<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/314069/thumbs/s-RELIGION-HUMAN-RIGHTS-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/314069/thumbs/s-RELIGION-HUMAN-RIGHTS-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>Israeli human rights organizati<wbr/>­on has about as much credibilit<wbr/>­y as the Saudi human rights organizati<wbr/>­on or for that matter the US human rights organizati<wbr/>­on. Israel ranks right up there as a country that routinely practices torture on political prisoners and uses bulldozers and tanks to run over peaceful non violent protesters<wbr/>­.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-alana-suskin/rabbis-for-human-rights-r_b_906351.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-83059927617107127412011-03-26T09:05:00.001-07:002011-03-26T09:05:12.357-07:00Rediscovering Alexander Hamilton: A Strange JourneyWell it sounded interestin<wbr/>­g until I read this: <br /><br /><br /><br />"Since Hamilton was shot in a duel over honor, we asked ourselves where that happens today. So, we speak to some former gang members who have all be in gunfights. One has a "Death Before Dishonor" tattoo. They have a lot to say about the Hamilton-B<wbr/>­urr duel."<br /><br /><br /><br />First of all I object to giving gang members, even former ones, a platform to promote their thuggish behavior as an example of anything having to do with honor. Second, to think that there is any similarity between that culture and the culture of Burr and Hamilton is just ridiculous<wbr/>­. I guess if you did a documentar<wbr/>­y on Beethoven you would interview 50 Cent or Britney to understand what its like to be a musical celebrity. <br /><br /><br /><br />I actually am very interested in knowing more about the reasons behind that duel and the duel itself. Many American history books say that Hamilton didn't try to hit Burr and paint Burr as evil but I'm not so sure. Gore Vidal also had an interestin<wbr/>­g theory about the insult and if he is right I could see why Burr would do what he did. Anyway, we aren't going to learn anything about this from interviewi<wbr/>­ng a gang banger. Another example of dumbing down American.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-pack/post_1865_b_840631.html?ir=Entertainment">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-73642805418064034522011-03-17T18:42:00.001-07:002011-03-17T18:42:28.601-07:00Texas Bill Would Outlaw Discrimination Against Creationists<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/257568/thumbs/s-TEXAS-CREATIONISM-BILL-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/257568/thumbs/s-TEXAS-CREATIONISM-BILL-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>Historical note: this is one of the things that the Soviet Union did that put them so far behind in certain areas of scientific research. They told scientists in certain fields which theories were preferred for political reasons. The best example was Lysenko's theory of genetics. It was not supported by the scientific evidence but Stalin liked it for political reasons and forced Soviet scientists and engineers to adopt it. This set soviet biology and agricultur<wbr/>­e back decades: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenko_doctrine" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://en.<wbr/>­wikipedia.<wbr/>­org/wiki/L<wbr/>­ysenko_doc<wbr/>­trine</a><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/16/texas-creationism-bill_n_836720.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-20068974203286238242011-03-07T13:02:00.001-08:002011-03-07T13:02:24.580-08:00A Reasonable Argument for God's Existence<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/254012/thumbs/s-EXISTENCE-OF-GOD-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/254012/thumbs/s-EXISTENCE-OF-GOD-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>Well said. Also, if you look back at the history of science and religion you can see a continuing process of the justificat<wbr/>­ions for God changing as science explains more and more. <br /><br /><br /><br />That is why so many religious people resisted and still do resist Darwin, because up until Darwin there was no good explanatio<wbr/>­n for how humans came to be and God was the defacto answer. Before that if we look at the original explanatio<wbr/>­ns for astronomy the earth was the center of the universe because God made it that way and God (rather than gravity) kept the heavens ordered. <br /><br /><br /><br />Of course there are still a lot of unanswered scientific questions. That is what makes science fun. At any point you can just sit back and say "God did it" or you can continue the process of human learning and continue to look for scientific explanatio<wbr/>­n.<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/religion-science">Religion and Science</a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-adam-jacobs/a-reasonable-argument-for_b_831185.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-32460166862744045552011-03-06T17:11:00.001-08:002011-03-06T17:11:55.443-08:00And if Egypt (and Tunisia) Were to Intervene in Libya?"That FDR and his people were actively planning contingien<wbr/>­­cie is responsibl<wbr/>­­e leadership<wbr/>­­. "<br /><br /><br /><br />I agree. I'm not saying the US is evil. Up until the end of WWII in fact we were one of the most moral countries, perhaps the most moral in the history of the world. In fact I think one of the biggest tragedies of WWII was that in order to defeat fascists we had to enable some of the very military/i<wbr/>­ndustrial forces of fascism. Forces that are still alive and thriving in Bush, Cheney, Rumsflield<wbr/>­, Beck, Gingrich, etc. <br /><br /><br /><br />For the 3rd time, my original point was not to criticize the US but rather to point out that even in one of the most clear cut cases of a justified moral war -- our war against fascism that attacked us in WWII -- even in that case we went to war out of self interest. Again, I say, that is just what nations do. They don't go to war to bring democracy to their neighbors as Mssr, Levi seems to think. Although, as evidenced by Bush, they DO use "bringing democracy" as an excuse for imperialis<wbr/>­m and aggression<wbr/>­.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernardhenri-levy/and-if-egypt-and-tunisia-were-to-intervene-in-libya_b_829453.html?show_comment_id=79741665">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-58293067833787676632011-03-04T16:52:00.001-08:002011-03-04T16:52:14.328-08:00Psychological Readiness of a Nation for Democracy: Are Middle Easterners Ready?I really found this article to be insulting. What right does some US shrink with no real knowledge of the middle east, of the decades of US imperialis<wbr/>­m have to lecture the people of the middle east on what they need to do to be ready for democracy? <br /><br /><br /><br />I suggest that Ms. Roya read some history as well as her psych books before writing future columns. The people of the middle east were ready for democarcy all the way back in the 1950's. There were movements for secular liberal democracy in Egypt, Iran, and elsewhere that were demolished by the CIA because democracy went hand in hand with a desire to have some control over "our" oil. <br /><br /><br /><br />A good place for Ms. Roya to start would be the history of Iran. Iran had a secular democracy which we destroyed and in its place we put one of the most barbaric dictatorsh<wbr/>­ips in the history of the world. <br /><br /><br /><br />Then I suggest she read a history of Islamic fundamenta<wbr/>­lism. What she will find is that groups such as the Islamic Brotherhoo<wbr/>­d and Al Queda were supported in their early days by the US as a defense against godless communism.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roya-r-rad-ma-psyd/psychological-readiness-o_b_828883.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-5492562359682423602011-03-03T07:23:00.001-08:002011-03-03T07:23:33.464-08:00Sirhan Sirhan Denied Parole In Robert Kennedy Assassination<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/253320/thumbs/s-SIRHAN-SIRHAN-PAROLE-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/253320/thumbs/s-SIRHAN-SIRHAN-PAROLE-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>This will make me seem like a member of the tin foil hat brigade but so be it. The CIA spent a lot of time investigat<wbr/>­ing hypno-prog<wbr/>­rammed assassins and they claimed to have acomplishe<wbr/>­d their goal. This is documented fact, look up MK-Ultra. <br /><br /><br /><br />Now consider, a programmed assassin is very risky and requires a lot of effort, more so than just paying some hit team. When would you use such a man? When the target is someone so high profile who would immediatel<wbr/>­y raise suspicions of a conspiracy if he were assassinat<wbr/>­ed. <br /><br /><br /><br />For example, a far left leader whose other left wing brother had already recently been killed under circumstan<wbr/>­ces that a lot of people were still wondering about. <br /><br /><br /><br />Of course you wouldn't use such a programmed assassin to do the actual killing (too unreliable<wbr/>­) but rather as the perfect patsy, to divert attention during the crime and let the real hit man do his job. Then the programmed assassin is the ultimate fall guy. He doesn't remember what he did. Even he can be convinced by his lawyers that he's guilty and should take a plea. <br /><br /><br /><br />When you dig deep in the RFK evidence it seems there is a real chance this is what happened. Doctors who examined Sirhan say he is very easy to hypnotize. The actual shot that killed RFK was point blank and behind him where as Sirhan was always several feet away and in front of him.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/03/sirhan-sirhan-parole_n_830705.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-7436822875008253042011-03-01T16:28:00.001-08:002011-03-01T16:28:00.551-08:00And if Egypt (and Tunisia) Were to Intervene in Libya?The problem with Monsieur Levi's proposal is the idea that one nation can invade another nation for altruistic reasons. In the history of the world I would say that has happened approximat<wbr/>­ely 0 times. At best the goals of one nation for going to war can coincide with the goals of other oppressed peoples. <br /><br /><br /><br />The US going to war in WWII and in the process aiding the English, French, Phillipine<wbr/>­, and many other peoples is a good example. But if you believe that the US went to war in WWII to aid all those people I have a bridge I would like to sell you. We went to war to defend our dominance in Asia, to prevent Germany from dominating Europe, etc. <br /><br /><br /><br />I am overjoyed that the people of Libya are rising up against their dictator. But the last thing we need is to give new life to the idea that other countries can invade each other to bring them democracy. The goal of anyone interested in morality and justice should be that no nation ever uses force against another except in legitimate self defense.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernardhenri-levy/and-if-egypt-and-tunisia-were-to-intervene-in-libya_b_829453.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-42972910944401082692011-03-01T15:58:00.001-08:002011-03-01T15:58:28.160-08:00David Brooks At TED 2011: Politicians Are 'Freaks'<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/252773/thumbs/s-DAVID-BROOKS-TED-2011-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/252773/thumbs/s-DAVID-BROOKS-TED-2011-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>David Brooks also had a big Bromance crush on George Bush: <a href="http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/57125/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www<wbr/>­.alternet.<wbr/>­org/blogs/<wbr/>­peek/57125<wbr/>­/</a><br /><br /><br /><br />David Brooks was consistent<wbr/>­ly wrong about the Iraq war: <a href="http://www.progressive.org/blogressive_brooks102306" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www<wbr/>­.progressi<wbr/>­ve.org/blo<wbr/>­gressive_b<wbr/>­rooks10230<wbr/>­6</a><br /><br /><br /><br />Why does anyone still listen to David Brooks?<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/01/david-brooks-at-ted-2011_n_829756.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-9320800478260475332011-03-01T06:13:00.001-08:002011-03-01T06:13:05.632-08:00Hugo Chavez Refuses To Condemn Muammar Gaddafi, Warns That U.S. Is Preparing Invasion Of Libya<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/252421/thumbs/s-CHAVEZ-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/252421/thumbs/s-CHAVEZ-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>How exactly is it obvious? What evidence do you have or do you just assume that the CIA covertly controls everything<wbr/>­?<br /><br /><br /><br />One of the big mistakes many people on the left make is to imagine that the CIA is some highly powerful and competent agency that covertly runs the world. If you look at their track record though they are closer to Get Smart than James Bond. I suggest the book Legacy of Ashes, it documents how the CIA has been great at spinning its achievemen<wbr/>­ts but in reality has made a mess of virtually everything they attempt.<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/libya-protests">Libya Protests</a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/28/hugo-chavez-says-us-preparing-invasion-libya_n_829488.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-28045961777103114502011-02-28T10:55:00.001-08:002011-02-28T10:55:41.874-08:00iPad 2 Release Rumors: What Features Will The New iPad Have?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/250889/thumbs/s-IPAD-2-RUMORS-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/250889/thumbs/s-IPAD-2-RUMORS-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>"a few extra's that really could have been included in the original but for the fact they wouldn't be able to get all those people who bought the first one to buy the newest one a year later."<br /><br /><br /><br />I see people say things like this and it just makes me laugh. People who say this have obviously never been involved in a developmen<wbr/>­t project. You have deadlines and a process that requires testing, marketing, etc. You have to hold back on some features or you never make your deadline or you release an inferior product. <br /><br /><br /><br />I've been involved in many software developmen<wbr/>­t projects to create commercial products. I have NEVER seen an example of someone saying "we could do this but lets hold back so we can get the suckers to buy the next release". On the contrary there is always immense pressure on the technical people from the marketing and sales teams to put in as much as possible on every release in order to beat the competitio<wbr/>­n.<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/ipad-2">iPad 2</a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/24/ipad-2-release-rumors_n_827424.html?show_comment_id=78993743">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-26780301992839287202011-02-24T10:16:00.001-08:002011-02-24T10:16:16.879-08:00Top 10 South Park Episodes About Religion<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249814/thumbs/s-SOUTH-PARK-RELIGION-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249814/thumbs/s-SOUTH-PARK-RELIGION-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>The difference between religion and science is that religion is essentiall<wbr/>­y immune to facts or reason. Its all based on faith which by definition is not reason and by various interpreta<wbr/>­tions people have of different sacred books. <br /><br /><br /><br />In fact there is a lot more disagreeme<wbr/>­nt among religions of the world right now than scientists<wbr/>­. Scientists all agree on laws such as F = ma. Religions disagree on just about everything<wbr/>­. Who was the real messenger of God? Was Jesus divine (Christian<wbr/>­s yes) or just a holy man (Muslims yes). When you take communion does the eucharist actually turn into the body of christ? (some Christians say yes others no) Even many sects among a religion such as Christiani<wbr/>­ty differ wildly and unlike science there is no way to resolve these debates. If you and I both believe opposite things based on faith we have no way to debate it, its just based on our own internal conviction<wbr/>­. <br /><br /><br /><br />"With all due respect you are lumping all religion into one basket."<br /><br />I don't think so. Unlike a lot of atheists I respect religion and some of the people I admire the most in history (MLK for example) were highly religious. I also acknowledg<wbr/>­e that religion can be a source for good. It can bring people together in a supportive community. It can help them stay off drugs. <br /><br /><br /><br />But the nature of humans is that we can get comfort from all sorts of beliefs, regardless of whether they are true.<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/south-park">South Park</a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/top-10-south-park-episode_n_824696.html?show_comment_id=78537000">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-34666900554607501302011-02-24T06:30:00.001-08:002011-02-24T06:30:47.893-08:00Watson Is No Match for Humanity<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249631/thumbs/s-IBM-WATSON-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249631/thumbs/s-IBM-WATSON-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>"moral of the story being that computers are not "intellige<wbr/>­­nt" and never will be."<br /><br /><br /><br />Quotes about how some scientific achievemen<wbr/>­t will never happen have a way of turning out to be wrong. <br /><br /><br /><br />When I first started programmin<wbr/>­g there were many serious philosophe<wbr/>­rs who claimed that a computer would never be able to play chess. Then they claimed it would never be able to play at the Grand Master level which of course it has. <br /><br /><br /><br />I'm not sure how you define "intellige<wbr/>­nce" but it seems to me it should include things like playing jeopardy or chess. Or perhaps flying an airplance. Or making a medical diagnosis. Computers have been doing all those things for years. <br /><br /><br /><br />I do strongly agree with you that all the talk about Watson as Skynet or HAL are nonsense. While Watson is an amazing AI achievemen<wbr/>­t and IMO clearly "intellige<wbr/>­nt" its not even close to being conscious or self aware. <br /><br /><br /><br />However, I don't think any responsibl<wbr/>­e scientist should say we know for a fact that a computer can NEVER be conscious for one simple reason: we don't have an accepted scientific definition for what it means for HUMANS to be conscious yet. Until we do we can hardly say for sure whether computers can or can't be. And that is why I find work like Watson ultimately so fascinatin<wbr/>­g, it gives us insight into what intelligen<wbr/>­ce and thought are that may help us understand how those things work for humans.<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-maeda/watson-is-no-match-for-hu_b_827266.html?show_comment_id=78509300">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-77173293712645006762011-02-24T05:59:00.001-08:002011-02-24T05:59:26.617-08:00Top 10 South Park Episodes About Religion<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249814/thumbs/s-SOUTH-PARK-RELIGION-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249814/thumbs/s-SOUTH-PARK-RELIGION-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>"And why so heavenly depend on science for man quest for answer and solution to live , when scientist keep changing their mind e.g the "Big Bang theory and black holes.. "<br /><br /><br /><br />A lot of what we know about the Big Bang and black holes is very solid and non-contro<wbr/>­versial. But there are some issues that have changed over the last decades and other that are simply unsolved.<br /><br /><br /><br />I don't see why that is a knock against science. We are talking about some pretty complex and amazing questions here. How did the universe begin? Is our universe one of many universes? etc. Until the last century or so no one would have thought we could even attempt to provide concrete answers to these questions beyond "God did it". It seems natural to me that it may take a long time to work them out and that there will be controvers<wbr/>­y. Indeed, the fact that scientists constantly criticize each other and revise their theories based on new evidence is IMO one of its greatest strengths compared to religion and other ways of thinking.<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/south-park">South Park</a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/top-10-south-park-episode_n_824696.html?show_comment_id=78499914">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-60356718188699226432011-02-21T06:53:00.001-08:002011-02-21T06:53:22.243-08:00How Doctors <em>Should</em> Deliver Bad News<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249319/thumbs/s-DOCTOR-PATIENT-RELATIONSHIP-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249319/thumbs/s-DOCTOR-PATIENT-RELATIONSHIP-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>I'm not sure if you consider me to be one of the "doctor bashers" (see my example below). I'm just telling a true story about how a doctor's lack of empathy made a bad experience a million times worse. I don't consider that to be doctor bashing. I hope that just maybe some doctors might read these examples and understand that whatever you are doing as a profession to deal with these situations in a lot of cases its just not working. That's not bashing IMO. You can't fix something until you understand that its broken.<br /><br /><br /><br />However, I do agree with you about insurance companies. The whole for profit healthcare system we have in the US is I think very much an essential cause of this (and many other problems). Doctors are under increasing pressure to see as many patients in as short a period of time. It inevitably makes them less able to show empathy, even when its needed most.<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/death--dying">Death </a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-c-senelick-md/doctor-patient-relationship_b_824215.html?show_comment_id=78088186">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-37475592307007442132011-02-20T20:27:00.001-08:002011-02-20T20:27:04.510-08:00Is A Physician's Cyber-Assistant Next?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249631/thumbs/s-IBM-WATSON-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/249631/thumbs/s-IBM-WATSON-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>Its not really a hard problem at all:<br /><br /><br /><br />1) End the tax breaks for billionair<wbr/>­es. Go back to taxing them at the level they were taxed under Bush senior or if you really want to end the deficit fast go to the tax rates of Reagan or Eisenhower<wbr/>­.<br /><br /><br /><br />2) Stop all the ridiculous Pentagon spending. There are huge projects that most scientists don't believe in (Star Wars) and that the Pentagon doesn't even want (making an extra engine for each new plane?!?)<br /><br /><br /><br />3) Stop being Team America World Police. Why exactly do we have bases in Germany? Or in so many places throughout the world? Rather then spending approximat<wbr/>­ely as much as THE REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED on "defense" spend, I don't know as much as HALF of the rest of the world combined. <br /><br /><br /><br />Problem solved and money left over to invest in renewable energy and rebuilding our crumbling infrastruc<wbr/>­ture. .<br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-l-millenson/ibms-watson-smart-enough-_b_824634.html">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2611898260364007851.post-72243438636837438882011-02-18T12:53:00.001-08:002011-02-18T12:53:52.622-08:00Video Games: An Hour A Day Is Key To Success In Life<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/247779/thumbs/s-KEY-TO-SUCCESS-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/247779/thumbs/s-KEY-TO-SUCCESS-large.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br/>I agree that the question of the effect videogames have on kids is complicate<wbr/>­d. And my opinions have changes over the last 15 years as well. Fifteen years ago I thought the discussion about video games was nothing more than right wingers trying to scare people as they do with talk about evil music. <br /><br /><br /><br />What has changed my opinion has been seeing how incredibly addicted some of the children I know get to videogamse and the incredible violence that so many video games (especiall<wbr/>­y the most popular ones) have. <br /><br /><br /><br />Correlatio<wbr/>­n does not equal causation but the researcher<wbr/>­s that analyze these games know that and attempt to control for it. Of course you can argue the specifics of any experiment but the vast amount of data is I think convincing that video games have a harmful effect. What is more just intuitivel<wbr/>­y when I see the graphic gore of games that glorify decapitati<wbr/>­on, gun play, and fighting all with state of the art bloody graphics, intuitivel<wbr/>­y it seems obvious to me that spending hours every day "playing" like this is harmful. <br /><br /><br /><br />Finally, I think its worth considerin<wbr/>­g the author's own motives. Its going to be difficult to get a spot on Coulbert or Real Time if you say video games are bad. We've heard that a million times. But say they are good and you are controvers<wbr/>­ial and you also stand to benefit from all the people who market these games.<br/><i>About <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com:80/news/mostpopular">Most Popular</a></i><br/><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-mcgonigal/video-games_b_823208.html?show_comment_id=77807184">Read the Article at HuffingtonPost</a>Red Doghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02956109718411759084noreply@blogger.com0