Links on the site

I have had a few people ask me specifically what news sources I follow. In truth, more than I can count. I used to say it was about 20, I underestimated by a lot. It is probably closer to 40 or 50. The attempt is to get as broad a view as possible of a news story and catch trends.

I read the local news, national news, international news, alternate news sources, micro newspapers, television news and far out there news. I am not looking for the truth in a news source, I am looking to see the various pieces and approaches. In addition, I read many specialized magazines and news sources. I have provided links to some of them. I do not get a click through fee, my blog is not monetized, I am not a reporter, I am simply a guy following the news.

I read somethings that I would not recommend to others and therefore have not provided links. There are some news sources that I consider poison, I read them with that in mind. I have previously provided links to some of the foreign papers, I will make them permanent later.

When I was in college to get my degree in Political Science, the first they made us do was read the New York Times on a daily basis, the whole thing. We would get quizzed on it. John Kennedy would read as many papers a day as he could. Hitler, it is said, would take a newspaper from anyone he saw in his office and immediately read it. We are fortunate, in some ways, in that we can access more news sources over the internet and see the worlds take on events.

I should point out that I read very quickly. In addition, many papers will have the exact same article from AP or quote from another paper. This was not done as much in the past so now we are all hearing the same thing. If the FCC has their way, we only hear from "accredited" sources.

To anyone that has read this blog and followed the links in my posts, it will become immediately apparent that I don't trust the news, that is why I will often post to the source itself. I recommend you do the same when possible. After decades of writing research papers and position papers, I have learned to search for things in ways that I cannot quickly explain.

When I was in High School, a man came to make a presentation. He began by saying how much he appreciated having the opportunity to talk to American students. He explained how he was the Russian government and after some small talk began explaining what was wrong with America. The students were enraged and asked questions and made statements responding to him. Eventually he explained that he was not Russian and wanted to teach us about how propaganda worked. He then explained how newspapers and television used certain approaches to direct our beliefs. I will not explain the methodology but am amused by seeing it at work in our country and thank the man.

The purpose of mass media is to influence the masses. That is it's purpose. It is not there to inform, it is there to shape public opinion and make money. It's primary purpose is to shape opinion, money is secondary. You may find that hard to believe, it is true. People published free papers with no advertisements before they made money.

I don't think everyone will read as many news sources as me. I don't think you have to, I think if you do on occasion, you will be better off. I believe you should read at least your daily news, a micro paper, a national source and an international source. If you did that daily, you would begin to seek out more and your opinion of the world would change, quickly.

That sinking feeling

I want to quickly talk about sinkholes. First is this article about sinkholes in China.

Chinese sinkholes.

Guatemala City

Sinkholes are generally caused by a few specific things. It may be caused by the gradual erosion of soft, permeable rock or the collapse of an underground cave. Problem with the sinkholes in China and Guatemala City is that they are round and not caused by water. Look at the pictures.

Sinkholes caused by water are not round, they go to wherever the soil has the least resistance. Sinkholes caused by collapsing caves are not round either. The sinkholes in China and Guatemala City are round to the bottom. Having a three story building sink into one makes less sense as prior to construction one should have tested the soil and dug test holes. Just odd stuff.

A What if question, something light

I was driving home and came upon a thought. Telepathy. A singer named Lene Lovich wrote a song by that name. The lyrics follow:

"I know what ya done
I saw ya in my crystal
I saw you making love
I'm gonna get my pistol

Telepathy's gonna be the death of me
Telepathy's gonna be the death of me

I know what ya done before you even do it
Don't tell me ya story I can see throught it

Love is really mutual trust
Respect and understanding is a must
But my baby's mind is like a TV
And everthing I see make a fool of me

I know what you've done, yeh
You think I don't know
You been playing round with Mrs. So-And-So

Telepathy's gonna be the death of me

Oh, those little lies
Right, behind your eyes
I don't need no spies
With my ESP
You're not fooling me
But ohhhhhh, the jealousy"

The idea behind the song is simple. What if you dated someone who could read your mind, what would it be like? I will take it a step farther, what if you both could read each other's minds. Could you handle having your love know your every thought and you know theirs? How would it effect you?

Lets look at how a relationship develops and run through what the impact might be. You meet someone for the first date and you know they are thinking about how much money you make and you are thinking about how she might look with her clothes off. Could be a short date. All the things most people do to put their "best foot forward" would be meaningless.

But, lets say you both decided you were compatible. You begin dating seriously. You are walking down the street and see a lovely lady, you look for a second and think how pretty she is. Your date would not be able to complain because she no doubt saw men she found attractive, even if it was on television. Would you get over jealousy. Now, what if they seriously began thinking about sleeping with that other person?

Anyway, you get past those issues and marry. Hiding things from your partner would be a thing of the past. Agreeing on things for the sake of peace would be pointless. Misunderstanding would also disappear. You would never feel alone or misunderstood. You could have a true union. If you grew apart, you both would know it and have the opportunity to resolve it in the beginning. You would forced to deal with problems; but, they would be easier to resolve.

The risk would be that if one of you were not clear in your beliefs and your morals, you could give in to the beliefs of the other without thinking it through for yourself. The beauty is that you could fully experience things second hand. Sharing on a level that we cannot currently comprehend and you couldn't marry the wrong the person.

If you can truly imagine such a thing, would you want it? Would you be willing to risk having all of your weaknesses known to have a greater love? Would you look down on people the same if all of your thoughts could be read? It is easy to fake being a decent person, you merely follow the rules and conform to societies concept of acceptable. Couldn't do that if the other could actually read your mind and useless justifications would not work, you would no longer be able to lie to yourself, the other person would know.

Now here is the real kicker. Would it change what you liked in a person? Oh, it would. Can you imagine being with a beautiful women (yes, I am stereotyping to make a point) who was a complete and utter fool. Hearing nonsense in your head all day and night. I have known people who married for beauty alone. Would a man with all the money in the world be worth it if you had to hear him think about how he was going to lie, cheat and steal to get ahead? You would overlook a lot of physical things for true peace of mind.

Making representation less powerful

For the past 30 years there has been a trend to get rid of the dreaded "two party system". In California we are going to vote on having "open" primaries. Rather than voting for members of your party, you can vote for any party. Sounds good huh?

In England they are eliminating the two party system by going to proportional representation. Isn't it funny that they had the same idea as us at the same time or vice versa? I had previously posted on England's "coalition" government. Now lets look at what these changes will mean.

Lets start with the mantra that has been repeated to everyone for the past two years. "Too big to fail". We have been told that we cannot afford to have organizations that are too big to fail. What they really mean is too big to compete. That is what happens when you don't have two parties. Coalitions cannot make big changes, they can never agree on them.

The lack of one party with control is that you cannot make major changes. You cannot agree on a complete plan, only bits. That is the purpose behind getting rid of partisan politics. Once a general plan is in place, eliminate competition so that the rules, overall, stay.

It is not about too big to fail, it is about impossible to compete. That is the game. Imagine living in a society with 1% of the population being child molesters. In a no two party, "proportional" government, they would get 1% of the votes. If a party needed 1% to have control of the government, they would take the 1% knowing that the 1% will always be outvoted and cannot institute their bigger policies, they cannot change the fundamental laws. This also means that child molesters decide your final laws on everything else. Get it?

Don't listen to Bernanke

Bernanke is saying that the European debt crisis will only have a "moderate" impact on the United States. Don't believe anything he says. He is the same idiot that said the housing market would not crash, he said the market was sound, he said that the subprime problem would not spread. This traitor has not been right yet.

Here is the most likely scenerio. Greece will default, Spain will be at risk and our stock market will lose 20% or more. Get your money out of the market before the 18th. That is my opinion and advice.

Newspaper Links

Sydney Morning Herald


The London Times

The Japan Times

The Moscow Times

Africa Updates

Buenos Aires Herald

I have provided links to news sources from different parts of the world. This is to help the reader quickly see the international take on any event. Take a spin and check out what the world is saying. The papers were chosen at random, I have no opinion on any of them, it wouldn't matter, they all say the same garbage.

Coming of the Cloud

The future of technology is almost here. It is cloud computing and it will trade your privacy for security. Most people won't even notice the difference.

Wired Magazine article on Microsoft's coming cloud

I really do hope you will read the article, it is important to your future. The basics are that you will put all of your information, photos, phone logs, texts, twitters, documents, contacts, everything on servers controlled by Google or Microsoft or whoever. Nothing will be on your computer, not even software, it will merely be a conduit to access your information.

The benefits of this technology is that the programs you use will always be current, your computer will be cheaper, you will have access to programs on demand, you will be able to access your information from anywhere using multiple technologies including your television. The downside, others will have access to all your information, others will be able to profile you and your actions better and you can be denied access to your information completely.

Consider the consequences of where we are headed. If you can access any book online then why would we have libraries? Libraries are expensive, books are made from trees, cities and counties are cash strapped. Eventually there will be a move to prohibit, or make very expensive, the printing of anything on paper. It will be considered outdated and eco-terrorism.

These things will not happen overnight but they will happen. What then happens to alternate view points, how do they get communicated? A couple of years ago I began talking to people about the coming censorship of the internet. At the time I was looking at England, China and Australia. Some laughed at me, one in particular ended up moving to Australia. Australia now filters the internet. Couldn't happen here.

If you want to know what is going to happen in the future, look at the infrastructure being put in place. Ask yourself what can be done with the infrastructure and I guarantee you, somebody will use it in that manner. That is just a question of time. It is history.

Here is an article on Julian Assange, the founder of wikileaks. They are the ones who posted the video of soldiers killing unarmed people in Iraq. They also posted the climategate e-mails and Sarah Palin's private e-mails. People read about what he does and miss the bigger picture. Nothing done online is private.

Assange posted Scientology manuals on-line. When they complained, he published more. I am no fan of Scientology, I have already posted on it's founder. But lets look at how the information was used. It was used with a "If you don't like it, I will publish more of your private information" attitude. Do you really think that if Assange can get the information that the government can't do the same?

The Pentagon will demand access to your computer networks.

Interesting article on telephone companies relationship to the government

Now if you think these things cannot happen, some of them already did, you just don't know it. Google docs obtained by FBI. For those who don't believe, go back to sleep, it couldn't happen here.