Well I don't know what to think of Mike Griffin, the current NASA administrator. Clearly he is no candidate for change at NASA, since Griffin was involved with a shouting match with the original change candidate's lead transition member for the beleaguered space administration, Lori Garver.
The point in contention was Garver herself. Griffin, being an engineer, naturally looks down upon her, at one point saying she wasn't qualified to make engineering decisions. Fair enough. But the problem with Griffin and NASA isn't about who's making those decision. The problem is the inefficiency of NASA itself.
Already the ARES 1 rocket which would send men to orbit was delayed by a year from its original 2014 launch date. Such delays are the norm for NASA, but at what cost to the economy? No doubt astronomers and other scientists would frown upon any Obama administration's plan to slash their bloated pet projects. But unless they produce a viable technology that would be beneficial to the economy and the environment (two major issues facing a divided nation) we should at least delay these expensive projects, such as the Mars Science Laboratory.
I really hope that President Obama would instead force NASA to work on a cleaner jet engine technology, i.e., put back the Aeronautics in NASA. God knows we need a cleaner jet to travel across the globe. This would mean a significant cut in space based programs and a boost to aviation technology research and development projects like the X-43a hypersonic jet program.
For economic reason, I think we a manager, or at least, an engineer who thinks like a manager - someone who would for NASA to buck up.
Northern Lights
AURORA BOREALIS
Friday, December 12, 2008
Greed, not regulation!
Newsweek ran an interesting article today, in which Barrett Sheridan interviewed Yaron Brook head of Ayn Rand Institute. Being a staunch capitalists, Mr. Brook claims that the fundamental cause of the current financial meltdown was due to excess regulation of the financial market. One wonders if he was living on planet Earth for the past, oh I don't know, ten years or so?
If anything that the current collapse of gargantuan banks tells us is that the lack of regulation propelled these greedy bankers flaunt conventional wisdom and promoted sub-prime mortgage in the first place. Like the typical capitalist that he is, Mr. Brook claims regulation such as the Community Reinvestment Act was the hotbed for such financial derivatives mortgage securitization.
True, the CRA was enacted to ensure banks do not discriminate when lending to people with low incomes. But that does not give banks the authority to dole out mortgages with questionable practices to these low income borrowers at all.
What Mr. Brook doesn't understand is that the current financial collapse was, is due to the deregulation that capitalists like him lobbied the government - with the tacit support of another Rand follower, Alan Greenspan - to reduce the CRA to a meaningless piece of paper that's more worthy of a role as a toilet paper. Greenspan started deregulating the economy in the late 1990s, which Bush pushed to an overdrive in the last eight years. This gave bankers, well at least the greedy ones, the incentive to give out highly dubious mortgage loans to people who could not afford it, then securitizing these mortgages for profits god knows they can make if people start repaying their mortgage.
As it is, they couldn't, which meant that greedy bankers couldn't get their dirty hands on the interest on the securitized mortgages, which means they had to line up at Congress to get money. Funny how these capitalists cry out for government intervention when things go bad.
Point I'm trying to make here, is that the Mr. Brook's premise that regulation was the cause was illogical. If anything it is the greed of these bankers that rode down these financial institution in the first place.
If anything that the current collapse of gargantuan banks tells us is that the lack of regulation propelled these greedy bankers flaunt conventional wisdom and promoted sub-prime mortgage in the first place. Like the typical capitalist that he is, Mr. Brook claims regulation such as the Community Reinvestment Act was the hotbed for such financial derivatives mortgage securitization.
True, the CRA was enacted to ensure banks do not discriminate when lending to people with low incomes. But that does not give banks the authority to dole out mortgages with questionable practices to these low income borrowers at all.
What Mr. Brook doesn't understand is that the current financial collapse was, is due to the deregulation that capitalists like him lobbied the government - with the tacit support of another Rand follower, Alan Greenspan - to reduce the CRA to a meaningless piece of paper that's more worthy of a role as a toilet paper. Greenspan started deregulating the economy in the late 1990s, which Bush pushed to an overdrive in the last eight years. This gave bankers, well at least the greedy ones, the incentive to give out highly dubious mortgage loans to people who could not afford it, then securitizing these mortgages for profits god knows they can make if people start repaying their mortgage.
As it is, they couldn't, which meant that greedy bankers couldn't get their dirty hands on the interest on the securitized mortgages, which means they had to line up at Congress to get money. Funny how these capitalists cry out for government intervention when things go bad.
Point I'm trying to make here, is that the Mr. Brook's premise that regulation was the cause was illogical. If anything it is the greed of these bankers that rode down these financial institution in the first place.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Space exploration as a means to save the environment
Environmentalists, scientists, engineers and all those people with a PhDs, they've all point out that the reduction of green house effect is the numero uno on the list of things to do to save the Earth. I agree with them.
We need to change the way we produce the energy which drives our economy and to a lesser degree, our lives. We need to stop (or at least) consume less carbon producing fossil fuel. To that extent, yes we need to develop renewable resources to combat rising global temperatures.
But there is also another dimension to save the planet Earth, which is explosion of the human population.
The world would be inhabited by at least 9 billion human souls sometime in the next ten, twenty years or so. This exponential rise in the human population would put a strain on an increasingly burdened resources we have on this planet. By resources, I mean, water, oil, gas, coal and even the oxygen we breathe. The leaves only one way to solve this mess we're in: go up. Seriously!
Space is the next step in saving planet Earth. At the moment the giants of space exploration, i.e. NASA, ESA, JAXA and Burt Rutan's main goal in reaching the stars are either scientific (the search for E.T.) or commercial (satellites, the first orbital hotel, etc.). These agencies and corporations pour in vast amount of resources to explore the realms beyond our space just to produce the latest fashion trend, the fastest commercial aircraft and the lot.
Yet none of them thought of repopulating the human species to the heavens above as a solution to global warming, and to an extent, saving planet Earth.
Why would I consider this option, you might ask. The reason is, we simply do not have the resources to support life on dear old planet Earth. At the rate we are going right now, it would be a matter of decades before we ran out of oil that runs our cars. What then? Yes, we'll have a renewable energy by then, such as fusion technology, battery powered vehicles and so on.
But what about a place to live? We can just keep on building skyscrapers for a place to live. For one thing, where are we going to get all those iron we need to make steels? The answer lies, again, in space. The thousands of asteroids strewn across an orbit between Mars and Jupiter holds the key to mining these and other exotic resources.
The aspect would be the consumption of clean water, which would tend to spark wars between countries vying for them. Already, people in Zimbabwe are suffering due to a lack of clean water. India and Pakistan could go to war over their claims to a river which provides clean water for millions living near their borders. This burden could be elevated if we had a colony on Mars, where the ice caps could one day be melted to form vast oceans, which would then provide much needed supply of a vital ingredient for mankind.
But we don't have to go far in searching for water.
There are signs that our own moon could support life there, as evidenced by the discovery of polar ice caps. So a simple step to relieve the Earth from the burden of providing man with resources would be to build a permanent settlement on the lunar surface. Now, I'm thinking that such a settlement would be able to sustain millions of human beings on the lunar surface.
Hang on! Your asking, what about the technology to live in space? Well there's the rub. We can't just send a human being to space without finding a solution on how to live in space, can we? The answer of course, would be gleaned out of numerous experiments conducted on board space stations such as SkyLab, Mir and the International Space Station (ISS).
Problem is, there's a tendency that the space agencies across the globe to ignore the Noah's Ark nature of living in space and concentrate more on finding your friendly neighbourhood alien amoeba, bacterias and other such microscopic organisms. While such findings could provide valuable information on effects these microscopic organisms have on the human immune system, it should be used to produce vaccinations or cures to whatever disease the micro-organisms would inflict on us.
It would also be prudent to develop a completely new method to travel across the vast space to find a new home where man could live. Think of it as buying 13 cars to travel to the seven, different houses you own, Senator McCain. We need to stop relying on traditional hydrogen/oxygen based rocket engines and start researching a 'Warp Engine' technology as envisioned by Gene Roddenberry in Star Trek. Why not? I mean we are approaching a point in time where reality meets science fiction. So why not get a head start? We have the best brains and we can develop the resources to built such experimental devices. The largest particle collider in world at the Swiss-France border could be modified to carry out experiments which would reveal the possibility of such technology - so why not give it a go? What have we got to lose? Nothing, except the future of mankind.
Alright, I'll admit it. Such fictional concepts would take time to develop, centuries, if not decades. Yet it is imperative that we do not lose sight of the fact that the exponential rise in human population would deplete the resources available to us - probably by the end of the century. On that basis alone, we owe it to our future descendants the option of a permanent human settlement away from this green Earth.
So how about it? A game of golf on the sand dunes of Mars?
We need to change the way we produce the energy which drives our economy and to a lesser degree, our lives. We need to stop (or at least) consume less carbon producing fossil fuel. To that extent, yes we need to develop renewable resources to combat rising global temperatures.
But there is also another dimension to save the planet Earth, which is explosion of the human population.
The world would be inhabited by at least 9 billion human souls sometime in the next ten, twenty years or so. This exponential rise in the human population would put a strain on an increasingly burdened resources we have on this planet. By resources, I mean, water, oil, gas, coal and even the oxygen we breathe. The leaves only one way to solve this mess we're in: go up. Seriously!
Space is the next step in saving planet Earth. At the moment the giants of space exploration, i.e. NASA, ESA, JAXA and Burt Rutan's main goal in reaching the stars are either scientific (the search for E.T.) or commercial (satellites, the first orbital hotel, etc.). These agencies and corporations pour in vast amount of resources to explore the realms beyond our space just to produce the latest fashion trend, the fastest commercial aircraft and the lot.
Yet none of them thought of repopulating the human species to the heavens above as a solution to global warming, and to an extent, saving planet Earth.
Why would I consider this option, you might ask. The reason is, we simply do not have the resources to support life on dear old planet Earth. At the rate we are going right now, it would be a matter of decades before we ran out of oil that runs our cars. What then? Yes, we'll have a renewable energy by then, such as fusion technology, battery powered vehicles and so on.
But what about a place to live? We can just keep on building skyscrapers for a place to live. For one thing, where are we going to get all those iron we need to make steels? The answer lies, again, in space. The thousands of asteroids strewn across an orbit between Mars and Jupiter holds the key to mining these and other exotic resources.
The aspect would be the consumption of clean water, which would tend to spark wars between countries vying for them. Already, people in Zimbabwe are suffering due to a lack of clean water. India and Pakistan could go to war over their claims to a river which provides clean water for millions living near their borders. This burden could be elevated if we had a colony on Mars, where the ice caps could one day be melted to form vast oceans, which would then provide much needed supply of a vital ingredient for mankind.
But we don't have to go far in searching for water.
There are signs that our own moon could support life there, as evidenced by the discovery of polar ice caps. So a simple step to relieve the Earth from the burden of providing man with resources would be to build a permanent settlement on the lunar surface. Now, I'm thinking that such a settlement would be able to sustain millions of human beings on the lunar surface.
Hang on! Your asking, what about the technology to live in space? Well there's the rub. We can't just send a human being to space without finding a solution on how to live in space, can we? The answer of course, would be gleaned out of numerous experiments conducted on board space stations such as SkyLab, Mir and the International Space Station (ISS).
Problem is, there's a tendency that the space agencies across the globe to ignore the Noah's Ark nature of living in space and concentrate more on finding your friendly neighbourhood alien amoeba, bacterias and other such microscopic organisms. While such findings could provide valuable information on effects these microscopic organisms have on the human immune system, it should be used to produce vaccinations or cures to whatever disease the micro-organisms would inflict on us.
It would also be prudent to develop a completely new method to travel across the vast space to find a new home where man could live. Think of it as buying 13 cars to travel to the seven, different houses you own, Senator McCain. We need to stop relying on traditional hydrogen/oxygen based rocket engines and start researching a 'Warp Engine' technology as envisioned by Gene Roddenberry in Star Trek. Why not? I mean we are approaching a point in time where reality meets science fiction. So why not get a head start? We have the best brains and we can develop the resources to built such experimental devices. The largest particle collider in world at the Swiss-France border could be modified to carry out experiments which would reveal the possibility of such technology - so why not give it a go? What have we got to lose? Nothing, except the future of mankind.
Alright, I'll admit it. Such fictional concepts would take time to develop, centuries, if not decades. Yet it is imperative that we do not lose sight of the fact that the exponential rise in human population would deplete the resources available to us - probably by the end of the century. On that basis alone, we owe it to our future descendants the option of a permanent human settlement away from this green Earth.
So how about it? A game of golf on the sand dunes of Mars?
Getting the economy back on track
In my previous article on the bailout of US banks, I mentioned that the government should have bailed out the middle class instead. There was a slight problem in which I have overlooked in my article, namely the job loss and how it would force Americans onto the streets if Barack Obama carried out my plan. Well that's alright, since the answer to the loss of these American jobs would be to create more jobs.
Where to begin? Well for one thing the American infrastructure needs a complete overhaul. Years of neglect have worn out the roads, bridges, railroad tracks and buildings across the US. All these would require thousands of jobs, if not millions and governors of all 50 states have indicated that they would like the President-elect to inject billions into these projects. That's good, since the governors from both side of the aisle note that some states have run out of money in their treasuries to carry out such projects. Those engineers and technicians would be put to better use in addressing the neglected infrastructure in the US.
Then, there is the urgent need to centralize the health care database across the country. Hospitals and clinics across the country could benefit from a centralized database of patient records, thus eliminating the time taken in requesting patients' medical records should he or she cross state lines, thus cutting significantly health care costs in the US. This would require thousands computer scientists, software engineers, electronic engineers and etc. to synchronize the database. Again this requires some significant amount of federal funding, and the President-elect should have no problem in eliciting bipartisan support for such a program.
President-elect Obama could also create a tax-free zones across the US to promote existing and new green companies who could create, again, thousands, if not millions of jobs. These companies should be able to produce green technology products not only for America, but also for European nations who face a more assertive Russia in obtaining they current energy needs.
The President-elect should support a nationalization of the big three automakers in return for a federal bailout package. This would then ensure that the Americans could then concentrate on greening the American cars, which some of these automakers have already a head start.
Well these are just a few examples in which President-elect Obama could create jobs in America to promote a bailout plan for middle class Americans. The most important thing for the new administration is to stay open minded and be creative in its quest to improve the American economy.
Of course all these measures would be for nothing if the new President could not resolve the cause of the current depression through sweeping legislative reforms. In essence, President-elect Obama needs to prevent banks from getting greedy - again!
Where to begin? Well for one thing the American infrastructure needs a complete overhaul. Years of neglect have worn out the roads, bridges, railroad tracks and buildings across the US. All these would require thousands of jobs, if not millions and governors of all 50 states have indicated that they would like the President-elect to inject billions into these projects. That's good, since the governors from both side of the aisle note that some states have run out of money in their treasuries to carry out such projects. Those engineers and technicians would be put to better use in addressing the neglected infrastructure in the US.
Then, there is the urgent need to centralize the health care database across the country. Hospitals and clinics across the country could benefit from a centralized database of patient records, thus eliminating the time taken in requesting patients' medical records should he or she cross state lines, thus cutting significantly health care costs in the US. This would require thousands computer scientists, software engineers, electronic engineers and etc. to synchronize the database. Again this requires some significant amount of federal funding, and the President-elect should have no problem in eliciting bipartisan support for such a program.
President-elect Obama could also create a tax-free zones across the US to promote existing and new green companies who could create, again, thousands, if not millions of jobs. These companies should be able to produce green technology products not only for America, but also for European nations who face a more assertive Russia in obtaining they current energy needs.
The President-elect should support a nationalization of the big three automakers in return for a federal bailout package. This would then ensure that the Americans could then concentrate on greening the American cars, which some of these automakers have already a head start.
Well these are just a few examples in which President-elect Obama could create jobs in America to promote a bailout plan for middle class Americans. The most important thing for the new administration is to stay open minded and be creative in its quest to improve the American economy.
Of course all these measures would be for nothing if the new President could not resolve the cause of the current depression through sweeping legislative reforms. In essence, President-elect Obama needs to prevent banks from getting greedy - again!
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton? I don't think so!
When President-elect Barack Obama announced Hillary Clinton as his choice for the Secretary of State, I had no qualms with his choice, that is, until I watched CNN Presents Scream Bloody Murder by Christiane Amanpour.
The program was thorough investigation into genocides across the world, namely the killing fields of Cambodia, to the Balkan conflict in which Bosnian Muslims were slaughtered by Serbian forces, the Saddam Hussein's use of American made chemical weapons on Kurdish civilians in northern Iraq, the massacre of Tutsi minorities by Hutu extremists in Rwanda and finally the Sudan genocide in which the impotence of the United Nations was made clear - yet again.
What does these conflicts have to do with Hillary Clinton you might ask? Well I'm not going into all of them except for the Balkan war and the Rwandan genocide, two tragic conflicts that happened while Hillary's significant other, Bill was the President
First the Balkan wars. At the time of Clinton's accession, the Balkan wars were already underway, with Slobodan Milosevic, began to, shall we say, cleanse Yugoslavia of the Muslims and Croats who defile the Serbian motherland with their existence. Richard Holbrooke, a top US diplomat, pleaded for the newly elected President Clinton to employ US forces to halt the escalating situation in the Balkans. Clinton refused, leading the Serbians with a free hand to perpetuate the massacre in Srebenica. Only when the graveness of the situation in Bosnia became clear to the his administration that President Clinton sent in US forces to attack Serbian military assets. It too little, too late. The Dayton Peace Accord did not bring Milosevic to justice as should be done. Instead Milosevic was free to prepare for another war, this time in Kosovo four years later.
The Rwandan genocide presents another dark spot in Hillary's resume. The situation in Rwanda could have been resolved or at the very least, prevented the genocide of Tutsis with much less resources than the Balkan conflict required. According to Lieutenant General Romeo Dallaire, commander of the UN Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR) all that was required from the international community was 5,000 additional troops. But again, President Clinton failed to rally the international community, which instead called for UNAMIR to leave the country. The price for this failure: 800,000 Tutsi and moderate Hutu lives.
These are just two of President Bill Clinton's failure. There was also the incident in Somalia, in which US special forces were engaged with local rebel militias, chronicled in the book Black Hawk Down. What about the CIA's plan to capture Osama bin Laden from Kabul prior to the US Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.
These issues alone should have given President-elect Obama the justification in rejecting Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, for it questions her ability to handle a crisis in foreign hotspot. Yet, Mr. Obama wants to build a team of rivals. Whether this team would gel together is another question left for historians to decide.
As for me, do I think Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State would be good for President-elect Obama's administration? Based on the above evidences - I don't think so!
The program was thorough investigation into genocides across the world, namely the killing fields of Cambodia, to the Balkan conflict in which Bosnian Muslims were slaughtered by Serbian forces, the Saddam Hussein's use of American made chemical weapons on Kurdish civilians in northern Iraq, the massacre of Tutsi minorities by Hutu extremists in Rwanda and finally the Sudan genocide in which the impotence of the United Nations was made clear - yet again.
What does these conflicts have to do with Hillary Clinton you might ask? Well I'm not going into all of them except for the Balkan war and the Rwandan genocide, two tragic conflicts that happened while Hillary's significant other, Bill was the President
First the Balkan wars. At the time of Clinton's accession, the Balkan wars were already underway, with Slobodan Milosevic, began to, shall we say, cleanse Yugoslavia of the Muslims and Croats who defile the Serbian motherland with their existence. Richard Holbrooke, a top US diplomat, pleaded for the newly elected President Clinton to employ US forces to halt the escalating situation in the Balkans. Clinton refused, leading the Serbians with a free hand to perpetuate the massacre in Srebenica. Only when the graveness of the situation in Bosnia became clear to the his administration that President Clinton sent in US forces to attack Serbian military assets. It too little, too late. The Dayton Peace Accord did not bring Milosevic to justice as should be done. Instead Milosevic was free to prepare for another war, this time in Kosovo four years later.
The Rwandan genocide presents another dark spot in Hillary's resume. The situation in Rwanda could have been resolved or at the very least, prevented the genocide of Tutsis with much less resources than the Balkan conflict required. According to Lieutenant General Romeo Dallaire, commander of the UN Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR) all that was required from the international community was 5,000 additional troops. But again, President Clinton failed to rally the international community, which instead called for UNAMIR to leave the country. The price for this failure: 800,000 Tutsi and moderate Hutu lives.
These are just two of President Bill Clinton's failure. There was also the incident in Somalia, in which US special forces were engaged with local rebel militias, chronicled in the book Black Hawk Down. What about the CIA's plan to capture Osama bin Laden from Kabul prior to the US Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.
These issues alone should have given President-elect Obama the justification in rejecting Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, for it questions her ability to handle a crisis in foreign hotspot. Yet, Mr. Obama wants to build a team of rivals. Whether this team would gel together is another question left for historians to decide.
As for me, do I think Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State would be good for President-elect Obama's administration? Based on the above evidences - I don't think so!
Of Religion and Politics
The recent rise of the religious right in American politics should be of great concern for all rational, peace loving people across the globe. Though its not the first time religious issue was exploited to ensure a Repucblican victory in Presidential elections, it certainly woould not stop the GOP from the tried and successful tactic.
Religion was first exploited by the Republican nominee for President, Richard Nixon in the 1968 elections. The popular sentiments among the Southerners back then was their traditional party, the Democratic Party, sold them out on the issue of civil rights. By approving legislative agendas in repealing segregationist laws, the then President Lyndon B. Johnson created a perfect storm between white America and people of colored. For awhile, the Republicans did not have the proper response to the perceived threat to the white America - that is until Nixon ran for the office of the President of the United States for the second time in eight years.
Since Nixon won his first election in 1968, the Republicans won the race for White House three out of nine elections, prior to the 2008 elections.
President Jimmy Carter won the 1976 elections riding the wave of resentment voters felt towards the Republicans over the Watergate scandal. President Nixon was forced to resign when two investigative journalists ran a story that revealed the involvement of the White House in a burglary at the Democratic Party's headquarters, located at the Watergate Hotel.
Carter went on to lose the White House to Ronald Reagan in the 1980 elections, who exploited the siege of the American Embassy at Tehran, the gay and women's rights movement (both perceived as a threat to the religious right in the wake of the civil rights victory for minorities) and Carter's unpopular remedy for the tanking US economy, which was increasing the interest rate by the Federal Reserve, later proved as the single most important factor in stabilizing the economy.
Reagan, basking in the religious right's fervent rhetoric over the issue of homosexuality and women's rights in the 1970s, went on to cut taxes, reduce government spending and challenge the Soviet Union to tear down the Wall at Berlin. His optimistic leadership style did not waver even under mounting criticism for the handling the Iran Contra issue and the shooting down of a Korean airliner over Soviet airspace, among other things. Yet he was remembered as the man responsible for bringing down the 'Evil Empire' as he would call the Soviet Union, in quantifying the fight against the communist regime as evil versus the forces of good.
The election of the first Bush, George Herbert Walker Bush to the office was seen as a continuation of Reagan's agenda. Bush Sr. led an international force to repel Saddam Hussein's army from Kuwait. Yet, the in the election of 1992, the economy would take a backseat to religious fervor.
Bill Clinton, who won the election on the agenda to reform our economy went on the raise taxes to the top earners in the country, gave women the rights to carry out abortion legally, promoted gun control legislation and concentrate on reducing emissions in the fight against global warming.
Then came the infamous 2000 Presidential elections. The might of the religious right, waned during the 1990s prosperous Clinton years, came back in full force to elect George Walker Bush, the son of Bush Sr., to the office. Bush Junior instituted the disastrous tax cuts, gave preference, gun lobbyists, oil corporations and defense contractors preference in his legislative agenda for two consecutive terms. The rest as they say, is history.
The 2008 Presidential Elections campaign set some historic precedents, namely a woman, a Latino, and another African American running for the nomination of the Democratic Party. The unusually long race culminated in an African American gaining a major party's nomination for the Presidency in for the first time in American history. The Republicans created history too, by appointing its first female nominee for the vice-presidency.
The 2008 campaign saw some of the worst in American politics, with the religious right's rhetoric would escalate, soliciting violent tendencies among the public divided over the role of religion and race in American politics.
The challenge now for the new President, is to reassert the constitutional requirements that the church should be separated from the machinations of the state.
Religion was first exploited by the Republican nominee for President, Richard Nixon in the 1968 elections. The popular sentiments among the Southerners back then was their traditional party, the Democratic Party, sold them out on the issue of civil rights. By approving legislative agendas in repealing segregationist laws, the then President Lyndon B. Johnson created a perfect storm between white America and people of colored. For awhile, the Republicans did not have the proper response to the perceived threat to the white America - that is until Nixon ran for the office of the President of the United States for the second time in eight years.
Since Nixon won his first election in 1968, the Republicans won the race for White House three out of nine elections, prior to the 2008 elections.
President Jimmy Carter won the 1976 elections riding the wave of resentment voters felt towards the Republicans over the Watergate scandal. President Nixon was forced to resign when two investigative journalists ran a story that revealed the involvement of the White House in a burglary at the Democratic Party's headquarters, located at the Watergate Hotel.
Carter went on to lose the White House to Ronald Reagan in the 1980 elections, who exploited the siege of the American Embassy at Tehran, the gay and women's rights movement (both perceived as a threat to the religious right in the wake of the civil rights victory for minorities) and Carter's unpopular remedy for the tanking US economy, which was increasing the interest rate by the Federal Reserve, later proved as the single most important factor in stabilizing the economy.
Reagan, basking in the religious right's fervent rhetoric over the issue of homosexuality and women's rights in the 1970s, went on to cut taxes, reduce government spending and challenge the Soviet Union to tear down the Wall at Berlin. His optimistic leadership style did not waver even under mounting criticism for the handling the Iran Contra issue and the shooting down of a Korean airliner over Soviet airspace, among other things. Yet he was remembered as the man responsible for bringing down the 'Evil Empire' as he would call the Soviet Union, in quantifying the fight against the communist regime as evil versus the forces of good.
The election of the first Bush, George Herbert Walker Bush to the office was seen as a continuation of Reagan's agenda. Bush Sr. led an international force to repel Saddam Hussein's army from Kuwait. Yet, the in the election of 1992, the economy would take a backseat to religious fervor.
Bill Clinton, who won the election on the agenda to reform our economy went on the raise taxes to the top earners in the country, gave women the rights to carry out abortion legally, promoted gun control legislation and concentrate on reducing emissions in the fight against global warming.
Then came the infamous 2000 Presidential elections. The might of the religious right, waned during the 1990s prosperous Clinton years, came back in full force to elect George Walker Bush, the son of Bush Sr., to the office. Bush Junior instituted the disastrous tax cuts, gave preference, gun lobbyists, oil corporations and defense contractors preference in his legislative agenda for two consecutive terms. The rest as they say, is history.
The 2008 Presidential Elections campaign set some historic precedents, namely a woman, a Latino, and another African American running for the nomination of the Democratic Party. The unusually long race culminated in an African American gaining a major party's nomination for the Presidency in for the first time in American history. The Republicans created history too, by appointing its first female nominee for the vice-presidency.
The 2008 campaign saw some of the worst in American politics, with the religious right's rhetoric would escalate, soliciting violent tendencies among the public divided over the role of religion and race in American politics.
The challenge now for the new President, is to reassert the constitutional requirements that the church should be separated from the machinations of the state.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Why a President Bobby Jindal would be dangerous to India
In the wake of Barack Obama's victory on November 4, the Republican party was in a soul searching mode, looking for ways to win back both the Congress and the White House they lost to Democrats. All that is needed was for a GOP's own Obama - someone young and fresh and not a Washington insider (Obama spent two years in the US Senate before running for the White House). It did not take the Republicans long to find one in Bobby Jindal, the Louisiana Governor.
The prospect of Jindal running for President in 2012 is stirring the battered Republican base, not to mention the Indian diaspora living and working in America, and across the globe. Many among the community believe that an American President of Indian origin would be beneficial to a country already battered by the brazen attacks on Mumbai last week.
With all due respect, I beg to differ. I believe that a President Jindal would be a disaster for India for several reasons.
First and foremost, it is his religion that would cause great concern for an Indian, not that I'm saying that there's something wrong with being a Christian. Rather the brand of Christianity that he practices could raise eyebrows among any sane minds. His unequivocal support for teaching creationism is one. Abortion is another issue in which he has shown a strain of infamous right wing Republicans. All this while still supporting a war on a nation inflicted with pain and suffering for the better part of two decades. This is what Friedrich Nietzsche would call a slave morality complex.
In his work Daybreak: Reflections on Moral Prejudices, Nietzsche proposed that Christianity presents itself as slaves, exhibiting and promoting values such as charity, piety, meekness, restrain and subservience to overrun their masters (i.e., the Romans of the biblical times), thus gaining power and promoting the above mentioned values to the broader society. The problem with Christianity, according to Nietzsche, is that it preaches the above values yet at the same time, condemning and punishing others for pursuing their free will.
In that respect, the Republicans in general and Bobby Jindal specifically with regards to this discussion, the latter worked hard to pass legislation that has consistently persecuted individuals for exercising their individual rights rather than the beliefs of certain groups (or rather, the Evangelicals, in particular). For give me for saying so, but did not the forefathers of the United States of America promoted the separation of Church and State as a concept for a new nation, where individuals are free from the rigorous persecution by the Church?
Yet, the Republicans since Richard Nixon has consistently persecuted individuals for the asserting their rights as enshrined in the constitution of the US.
Indian-Americans, and their fellow Indians from across the globe should beware of such a man as Jindal, for, in his eagerness to attain political power, he would not hesitate to please the right-wing elements in the US by abolishing the basic human rights of those who does not share his Christian values.
As with Bush, a President Jindal would pursue with zeal, a faith based foreign policies, such as the misguided War on Terror against the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and their allies around the globe. Another example would be Bush's delusion in which he proclaims that God has spoken to him, instructing him to create a Palestinian state for the Palestine living under the brutal occupation of the Israeli regime, Bobby Jindal would no doubt will implement such policy in the name of God. He would not hesitate to preach Christianity to India's Hindu majority, through any means necessary. Such controversial move would inflame the right wing elements in the Hindu community to act against any perceived threat to their cultural and religious existence (what those responses would be, I do not dare to speculate).
At a time when the Hindus in India should remove the shackles of discrimination that binds minorities in the country to poverty - which promotes hatred towards the Hindu majority that is being exploited by Al-Qaeda and its Pakistani allies for their own means - the election of Bobby Jindal to the most powerful office in the world would prevent such reforms India desperately needs in an era where non-state terrorism presents the greatest threat to its existence.
In essence, such a man would bring the downfall of India, which I am sure the Indian Americans would not want to be responsible for.
The prospect of Jindal running for President in 2012 is stirring the battered Republican base, not to mention the Indian diaspora living and working in America, and across the globe. Many among the community believe that an American President of Indian origin would be beneficial to a country already battered by the brazen attacks on Mumbai last week.
With all due respect, I beg to differ. I believe that a President Jindal would be a disaster for India for several reasons.
First and foremost, it is his religion that would cause great concern for an Indian, not that I'm saying that there's something wrong with being a Christian. Rather the brand of Christianity that he practices could raise eyebrows among any sane minds. His unequivocal support for teaching creationism is one. Abortion is another issue in which he has shown a strain of infamous right wing Republicans. All this while still supporting a war on a nation inflicted with pain and suffering for the better part of two decades. This is what Friedrich Nietzsche would call a slave morality complex.
In his work Daybreak: Reflections on Moral Prejudices, Nietzsche proposed that Christianity presents itself as slaves, exhibiting and promoting values such as charity, piety, meekness, restrain and subservience to overrun their masters (i.e., the Romans of the biblical times), thus gaining power and promoting the above mentioned values to the broader society. The problem with Christianity, according to Nietzsche, is that it preaches the above values yet at the same time, condemning and punishing others for pursuing their free will.
In that respect, the Republicans in general and Bobby Jindal specifically with regards to this discussion, the latter worked hard to pass legislation that has consistently persecuted individuals for exercising their individual rights rather than the beliefs of certain groups (or rather, the Evangelicals, in particular). For give me for saying so, but did not the forefathers of the United States of America promoted the separation of Church and State as a concept for a new nation, where individuals are free from the rigorous persecution by the Church?
Yet, the Republicans since Richard Nixon has consistently persecuted individuals for the asserting their rights as enshrined in the constitution of the US.
Indian-Americans, and their fellow Indians from across the globe should beware of such a man as Jindal, for, in his eagerness to attain political power, he would not hesitate to please the right-wing elements in the US by abolishing the basic human rights of those who does not share his Christian values.
As with Bush, a President Jindal would pursue with zeal, a faith based foreign policies, such as the misguided War on Terror against the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and their allies around the globe. Another example would be Bush's delusion in which he proclaims that God has spoken to him, instructing him to create a Palestinian state for the Palestine living under the brutal occupation of the Israeli regime, Bobby Jindal would no doubt will implement such policy in the name of God. He would not hesitate to preach Christianity to India's Hindu majority, through any means necessary. Such controversial move would inflame the right wing elements in the Hindu community to act against any perceived threat to their cultural and religious existence (what those responses would be, I do not dare to speculate).
At a time when the Hindus in India should remove the shackles of discrimination that binds minorities in the country to poverty - which promotes hatred towards the Hindu majority that is being exploited by Al-Qaeda and its Pakistani allies for their own means - the election of Bobby Jindal to the most powerful office in the world would prevent such reforms India desperately needs in an era where non-state terrorism presents the greatest threat to its existence.
In essence, such a man would bring the downfall of India, which I am sure the Indian Americans would not want to be responsible for.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Glorious Gunners!
Arsenal fought back from a goal down to win their Barclay's Premier League match against leaders Chelsea.
Having lost five matches early in this season, pundits already ruled out the former 'Invincibles' from contention, with all those on going saga on and off the pitch culminating in the dismissal of William Gallas as the captain of a very young and inexperienced team.
Playing at Stamford Bridge in today's derby is not easy for the young guns. Having bullied around by the likes of Fulham, Hull, Stoke, Aston Villa and Manchester City, Fleet Street were already writing obituaries for the north London club, with all the drama Arsenal were facing in the locker room spilt fed by the sulking Gallas.
Certainly the first half belonged to Chelsea as they try to snuff Arsenal's game plan. The Blues took the lead by an own goal by Johan Djourou, which rattled Arsenal's defense once again. Having collected the ball from a corner kick, Manuel Almunia gave the ball away only for Bosingwa to cross into Djourou's unfortunate path. Arsenal came close to scoring, but Gallas squandered a wonderful chance to give the Gunners an early lead, and Robin van Persie's cross, which beat Petr Cech, could not find any red shirts within the six yards box to tuck it into an open goal. From that moment on, Chelsea kept pressing, with Arsenal happy to sit behind the ball.
The second half picked up right where they left off, Chelsea attacking a defensive Arsenal. At this point the forlorn figures from the visiting team were even more reluctant to press Chelsea's defense, with the Gunners' fans having to face the prospect of going home without a point.
Yet, all is not lost. Just before the hour mark, van Persie scored the equalizer despite being off-side, which - unfortunately for Chelsea - was missed by the assistant referee. That gave the Gunners much needed relief, and some self-esteem.
Arsenal started pressing, and were rewarded with a second goal three minutes later, again by the Dutch striker, who was on-side to receive a header from fellow strike partner Emmanuel Adebayor. That second sealed it for Arsenal, but Chelsea always threatened to equalize. This time, the young guns did not budge.
On and on Arsenal pressed, with Nicklas Bendtner, coming on for Adebayor, missing a wonderful chance to add to the tally. So did Denilson, who did well in the second half against the likes of John Obi Mikel and Deco in midfield.
In the end though, it was the two goals from the flying Dutch which gave all vital three points to Arsenal. And a chance to regain their competitiveness this season.
It also gave a flying start for Arsenal's new, young captain, Cesc Fabregas, who was instrumental in Arsenal's second half revival, with his impeccable passes creating problems for Chelsea's defense.
The challenge now for the young captain is to rally his team to fight back for the title, and for the glory!
Having lost five matches early in this season, pundits already ruled out the former 'Invincibles' from contention, with all those on going saga on and off the pitch culminating in the dismissal of William Gallas as the captain of a very young and inexperienced team.
Playing at Stamford Bridge in today's derby is not easy for the young guns. Having bullied around by the likes of Fulham, Hull, Stoke, Aston Villa and Manchester City, Fleet Street were already writing obituaries for the north London club, with all the drama Arsenal were facing in the locker room spilt fed by the sulking Gallas.
Certainly the first half belonged to Chelsea as they try to snuff Arsenal's game plan. The Blues took the lead by an own goal by Johan Djourou, which rattled Arsenal's defense once again. Having collected the ball from a corner kick, Manuel Almunia gave the ball away only for Bosingwa to cross into Djourou's unfortunate path. Arsenal came close to scoring, but Gallas squandered a wonderful chance to give the Gunners an early lead, and Robin van Persie's cross, which beat Petr Cech, could not find any red shirts within the six yards box to tuck it into an open goal. From that moment on, Chelsea kept pressing, with Arsenal happy to sit behind the ball.
The second half picked up right where they left off, Chelsea attacking a defensive Arsenal. At this point the forlorn figures from the visiting team were even more reluctant to press Chelsea's defense, with the Gunners' fans having to face the prospect of going home without a point.
Yet, all is not lost. Just before the hour mark, van Persie scored the equalizer despite being off-side, which - unfortunately for Chelsea - was missed by the assistant referee. That gave the Gunners much needed relief, and some self-esteem.
Arsenal started pressing, and were rewarded with a second goal three minutes later, again by the Dutch striker, who was on-side to receive a header from fellow strike partner Emmanuel Adebayor. That second sealed it for Arsenal, but Chelsea always threatened to equalize. This time, the young guns did not budge.
On and on Arsenal pressed, with Nicklas Bendtner, coming on for Adebayor, missing a wonderful chance to add to the tally. So did Denilson, who did well in the second half against the likes of John Obi Mikel and Deco in midfield.
In the end though, it was the two goals from the flying Dutch which gave all vital three points to Arsenal. And a chance to regain their competitiveness this season.
It also gave a flying start for Arsenal's new, young captain, Cesc Fabregas, who was instrumental in Arsenal's second half revival, with his impeccable passes creating problems for Chelsea's defense.
The challenge now for the young captain is to rally his team to fight back for the title, and for the glory!
Friday, November 28, 2008
Al-Qaeda's hit job?
It would seem that whomever was involved with the attacks on Mumbai, Al-Qaeda was rejoicing on its websites. Now mind you, if that's true, it does not necessarily mean they were involved directly in the attacks. Instead, they could have probably trained and provided the logistics (which apparently, includes Blackberry devices in addition to the usual AK-47s and grenades) to their Kashimiri counterparts
Based on this report, am I the only one in this whole wide world who thinks that Pakistan's intelligence agency, the Inter Services Intelligence, was involved in this incident - since ISI founded both the Taliban (who gave refuge to Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda) and the Kashimiri terrorists?
On the other hand, we have news services which loves to broadcast latest updates on the attack, which incidentally served as a lookout for these Blackberry wielding terrorists.
A Time magazine's instant poll found that most readers suspect the attack was perpetrated by international terrorists (it didn't say who, exactly) as opposed to domestic cells.
The Washington Independent reported that Pakistani President Ali Zardari, widower of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, dispatched the head of ISI to Delhi to assist the investigations into the attacks.
India should give the Pakistanis a chance to prove their commitment to peace and stability in the region. Attacking Pakistan would play into the hands of Al-Qaeda's number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri's wishes for a conflict between Pakistan and India. India must not fall into Al-Qaeda's trap.
One might wonder Al-Qaeda's logic in targeting India in such spectacular fashion. Well according to Amir Taheri, India is Afghanistan's largest aid donor and President Hamid Karzai's second most important ally after the US. It plays a leading role in training Afghanistan's police and army. Coupled with warming relationships with the US (India signed a civilian nuclear deal which Congress approved not too long ago) in which India could opt to purchase more military hardware from American defense contractors, these factors prove irresistible when planning an attack on India.
So the trick for India's Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh is to calm the right-wing elements within the government from attacking Pakistan or India's Muslim minority. It is one tough job that, if carried out successfully, would reap rewards at next year's general election.
Based on this report, am I the only one in this whole wide world who thinks that Pakistan's intelligence agency, the Inter Services Intelligence, was involved in this incident - since ISI founded both the Taliban (who gave refuge to Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda) and the Kashimiri terrorists?
On the other hand, we have news services which loves to broadcast latest updates on the attack, which incidentally served as a lookout for these Blackberry wielding terrorists.
A Time magazine's instant poll found that most readers suspect the attack was perpetrated by international terrorists (it didn't say who, exactly) as opposed to domestic cells.
The Washington Independent reported that Pakistani President Ali Zardari, widower of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, dispatched the head of ISI to Delhi to assist the investigations into the attacks.
India should give the Pakistanis a chance to prove their commitment to peace and stability in the region. Attacking Pakistan would play into the hands of Al-Qaeda's number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri's wishes for a conflict between Pakistan and India. India must not fall into Al-Qaeda's trap.
One might wonder Al-Qaeda's logic in targeting India in such spectacular fashion. Well according to Amir Taheri, India is Afghanistan's largest aid donor and President Hamid Karzai's second most important ally after the US. It plays a leading role in training Afghanistan's police and army. Coupled with warming relationships with the US (India signed a civilian nuclear deal which Congress approved not too long ago) in which India could opt to purchase more military hardware from American defense contractors, these factors prove irresistible when planning an attack on India.
So the trick for India's Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh is to calm the right-wing elements within the government from attacking Pakistan or India's Muslim minority. It is one tough job that, if carried out successfully, would reap rewards at next year's general election.
One missed chance
As I lie on my bed, thinking of the last two years of my life, as sense of grief struck me when I realized that I had missed an opportunity to make something meaningful out of my relationship with V. Had I choose a different path I now walk on, I began to wonder what life would be like share with V. I missed her so much that it's impossible for me to not think of her even for a day.
What do I miss about her? Well for one thing, her long dark curly tresses, her sparkling eyes, her precious smile, her wells of laughter, her smooth skin and gentle touch. Sufficed to say, her presence alone would make my heart skip a beat or two. My mouth would dry up, my hand trembles ever so slightly at her touch.
We would go out every weekend, partying at the local clubs - sometimes we would stay in and watch a movie, after a light vegetarian dinner I cooked for her. There were walks too, to the parks and other interesting places she knew in town (I admit, I'm not as adventurous as I let people know)...is this what people call love? If so, those feelings have subsided to the point where I can't feel a thing for anyone, anymore.
This numbness was replaced by the sarcasm I would display to the people around me, which would then comeback to bite my behind.
The point is, I miss V. I don't think I've ever met someone like her - gentle and graceful V. All that's left in my heart of hearts, is the emptiness that threatens to engulf my life. I know I should try hard to relieve this nothingness, yet the more I struggle against it, the more I asphyxiate. I crave to meet her, even though she might have moved on, for one last time. Perhaps someday I will.
Till then, I suppose I'll have to trudge along - alone!
What do I miss about her? Well for one thing, her long dark curly tresses, her sparkling eyes, her precious smile, her wells of laughter, her smooth skin and gentle touch. Sufficed to say, her presence alone would make my heart skip a beat or two. My mouth would dry up, my hand trembles ever so slightly at her touch.
We would go out every weekend, partying at the local clubs - sometimes we would stay in and watch a movie, after a light vegetarian dinner I cooked for her. There were walks too, to the parks and other interesting places she knew in town (I admit, I'm not as adventurous as I let people know)...is this what people call love? If so, those feelings have subsided to the point where I can't feel a thing for anyone, anymore.
This numbness was replaced by the sarcasm I would display to the people around me, which would then comeback to bite my behind.
The point is, I miss V. I don't think I've ever met someone like her - gentle and graceful V. All that's left in my heart of hearts, is the emptiness that threatens to engulf my life. I know I should try hard to relieve this nothingness, yet the more I struggle against it, the more I asphyxiate. I crave to meet her, even though she might have moved on, for one last time. Perhaps someday I will.
Till then, I suppose I'll have to trudge along - alone!
Nasa's bloated with irrelevancies
An op-ed in the New York Times by Alan Stern points to an interesting trend in NASA. In fact, one can point out that this trend has prevailed in other government agencies, which was perfected by the Pentagon.
Stern notes that NASA's budget has bloated out of control with its spectrum of space projects. The Space Shuttle program would be the cover girl for such issues, the International Space Station, another alternative, despite it being a joint space program with the European Space Agency (ESA), Canada, Russia and Japan.
Various theories were proposed for this phenomenon - the most critical being NASA's work culture, ethics if you will. Managers were constantly deflating the cost of projects, supporting the scientists and engineers who inflates the project's capabilities beyond its functional requirement. They do so with the knowledge that their Congressmen would not tolerate any cuts in NASA's budget, fearing any job losses in their constituencies which in turn, would translate into vote loss during an election year.
This similar tactic in which a government agency deflates the original cost of a contract is not new. The Pentagon was the first to perfect this, having created the military industrial complex which President Dwight Eisenhower warned in his last address to the nation prior to leaving the office.
The fact that NASA's resorting to such bullying tactic shows the lack of creativity in its workforce to manage its future, which at this point looks bleak in the face of stiff competition from ESA, Japan, the rising giants of Asia, India and China, and a resurgent Russia.
Stern notes that NASA's budget has bloated out of control with its spectrum of space projects. The Space Shuttle program would be the cover girl for such issues, the International Space Station, another alternative, despite it being a joint space program with the European Space Agency (ESA), Canada, Russia and Japan.
Various theories were proposed for this phenomenon - the most critical being NASA's work culture, ethics if you will. Managers were constantly deflating the cost of projects, supporting the scientists and engineers who inflates the project's capabilities beyond its functional requirement. They do so with the knowledge that their Congressmen would not tolerate any cuts in NASA's budget, fearing any job losses in their constituencies which in turn, would translate into vote loss during an election year.
This similar tactic in which a government agency deflates the original cost of a contract is not new. The Pentagon was the first to perfect this, having created the military industrial complex which President Dwight Eisenhower warned in his last address to the nation prior to leaving the office.
The fact that NASA's resorting to such bullying tactic shows the lack of creativity in its workforce to manage its future, which at this point looks bleak in the face of stiff competition from ESA, Japan, the rising giants of Asia, India and China, and a resurgent Russia.
Arsenal's next challenge
Ok. So they won the Champions League game against Ukrainian side, Dynamo Kiev - barely. But they had to labor for 86 minutes to break through Dynamo's defense. Not a promising start for Arsenal's new captain, Cesc Fabregas. Nonetheless, it will have to do for now.
Kiev proved a resilient opponent at Emirates, with Ismael Bagoura, Oleksandr Aliyev and Artem Milevskiy all came close to adding their name to the score sheet. Had they done so, Arsenal would have been dealt a serious blow to their already battered morale before the game at Stamford Bridge.
However, they did won the game, even with a controversial goal emanating from a dubious free kick when Fabregas should have passed the ball - in fair play - to Kiev. Yet referee Alain Hamer allowed the goal, despite Kiev's protests.
Minutes later Aliyev was sent-off when he shoved Hamer aside to take a free kick within yards of Arsenal's box. Which was not surprising given the fact that Aliyev at one point during the second half, fell down feigning injury, and yet, quickly rose and ran towards Arsenal's goal when Kiev played the advantage.
Still this victory should keep the feet of Arsenal's young lads firmly on the ground. Their next task would be insurmountable, given Chelsea's strong squad and Anelka's superb goal scoring form.
Fabregas's task seemed gargantuan, yet I do not envy him. He knows victory at Stamford Bridge would indeed be a moral booster for Arsenal.
It would also give the fans a renewed sense of faith in Arsene Wenger's philosophical game.
Kiev proved a resilient opponent at Emirates, with Ismael Bagoura, Oleksandr Aliyev and Artem Milevskiy all came close to adding their name to the score sheet. Had they done so, Arsenal would have been dealt a serious blow to their already battered morale before the game at Stamford Bridge.
However, they did won the game, even with a controversial goal emanating from a dubious free kick when Fabregas should have passed the ball - in fair play - to Kiev. Yet referee Alain Hamer allowed the goal, despite Kiev's protests.
Minutes later Aliyev was sent-off when he shoved Hamer aside to take a free kick within yards of Arsenal's box. Which was not surprising given the fact that Aliyev at one point during the second half, fell down feigning injury, and yet, quickly rose and ran towards Arsenal's goal when Kiev played the advantage.
Still this victory should keep the feet of Arsenal's young lads firmly on the ground. Their next task would be insurmountable, given Chelsea's strong squad and Anelka's superb goal scoring form.
Fabregas's task seemed gargantuan, yet I do not envy him. He knows victory at Stamford Bridge would indeed be a moral booster for Arsenal.
It would also give the fans a renewed sense of faith in Arsene Wenger's philosophical game.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
India needs green energy to combat Islamic terrorism
The recent attacks on Mumbai was perpetrated by radical Islamic terror cells who could be associated (training, logistics, etc.) with Al-Qaeda. If this is true, which I suspect it is, then it is imperative that India start churning out a plan to invest in green technology - since radical Islamic terror cells have been supported by Arabian royalties through various charities.
I've tried to find some info on the country's renewable technology policy, all I could come up with was some websites pointing to the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy which includes several policy on renewable energy. Which is great. However the question is, how much are they spending either to attract foreign investors in renewable technology or creating jobs and opportunities in that vital sector. In essence, the practical aspects of its energy security.
When Tata revealed its intention to build the world's cheapest car, priced at about $1000, critics argued that the introduction of an affordable car to the world's largest middle class population would strain an already burdened environment in India. Yet to most middle class Indians, owning a car is a dream, as much as living in your own house - a symbol of status. Which is sad, since the potential for public transportation in the country is enormous, particularly with an agricultural industry which could provide the ingredients in the production of biofuel.
The aging, smoke belching public buses in India should be discarded and replaced by new, more energy efficient buses from the West. The relevant technology could be transferred, creating a research base in India instead on relying on Western countries. Production of these buses could take place locally, employing thousands nationwide in a fast rising tech sector, thus giving the Indian workforce an added advantage in a world fast becoming a knowledge based economy.
India could also embark on new train technologies which would replace its diesel laden fleet. My personal favorite: MagLev technology. The technology uses the basic principal 'opposites attract' whereby magnets built into the guideways repel magnets place at the undercarriage of the train. The guideways' magnets would then propel the train forward. This is done while the train levitates a couple of inches above the guideway. The MagLev train would consume less energy than conventional trains since it floats and the only resistance it would encounter during its motion would be from the air around it. Land based vehicle spends most of its energy to overcome contact friction with roads and steel tracks. Again, the economic benefits of this technology transfer are many not the least that it would enable Indian scientists and engineers to develop new technology: superconducting magnets. The downside to this technology is that these superconductive magnets are relatively expensive and requires advanced refrigeration technology built onto the train.
There's also the potential to harness wind, solar and wave powers. Solar panels could line rural villages which require electricity to run water pumps, among other things. It could also be installed on rooftops in within cities, reducing the consumption of electricity generated by fossil fuels. On the other hand, research into silicone thin film coatings could produce coatings which could be applied to windows as a glazing material. The window would then function as a tint and convert sunlight into electricity.
Wind power is similar in that research into the technology and the construction of wind farms could be beneficial to both engineers and land owners, particularly if the land was farm land.
Wave power would create more jobs in marine technology and engineering sector. Both the wind and wave power generation could also create jobs in research, since both require experts in the field of aerodynamics.
As you can see, the benefits of investing in green technology to India are numerous, since India has the required manpower for these investments. Yet it perplexes me as to why they would enter an agreement with Pakistan (which actively provides anti-India terror cells a safe haven) to construct an pipeline which would transport oil from Iran. The money spent could be used to create these green jobs for thousands, if not millions of engineers, technicians, and scientists, not to mention the labors employed in constructing relevant infrastructures.
I could think of only one reason: corruption. It would seem that big oil companies in India stand to lose the most had India embarked on a serious drive to green the country, plus at a time of high oil prices, these are the people who would buy a politician's conviction to side with them, wrong though it maybe. Not to mention the automakers like Tata.
Yet again, India is being undone by corruption.
I've tried to find some info on the country's renewable technology policy, all I could come up with was some websites pointing to the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy which includes several policy on renewable energy. Which is great. However the question is, how much are they spending either to attract foreign investors in renewable technology or creating jobs and opportunities in that vital sector. In essence, the practical aspects of its energy security.
When Tata revealed its intention to build the world's cheapest car, priced at about $1000, critics argued that the introduction of an affordable car to the world's largest middle class population would strain an already burdened environment in India. Yet to most middle class Indians, owning a car is a dream, as much as living in your own house - a symbol of status. Which is sad, since the potential for public transportation in the country is enormous, particularly with an agricultural industry which could provide the ingredients in the production of biofuel.
The aging, smoke belching public buses in India should be discarded and replaced by new, more energy efficient buses from the West. The relevant technology could be transferred, creating a research base in India instead on relying on Western countries. Production of these buses could take place locally, employing thousands nationwide in a fast rising tech sector, thus giving the Indian workforce an added advantage in a world fast becoming a knowledge based economy.
India could also embark on new train technologies which would replace its diesel laden fleet. My personal favorite: MagLev technology. The technology uses the basic principal 'opposites attract' whereby magnets built into the guideways repel magnets place at the undercarriage of the train. The guideways' magnets would then propel the train forward. This is done while the train levitates a couple of inches above the guideway. The MagLev train would consume less energy than conventional trains since it floats and the only resistance it would encounter during its motion would be from the air around it. Land based vehicle spends most of its energy to overcome contact friction with roads and steel tracks. Again, the economic benefits of this technology transfer are many not the least that it would enable Indian scientists and engineers to develop new technology: superconducting magnets. The downside to this technology is that these superconductive magnets are relatively expensive and requires advanced refrigeration technology built onto the train.
There's also the potential to harness wind, solar and wave powers. Solar panels could line rural villages which require electricity to run water pumps, among other things. It could also be installed on rooftops in within cities, reducing the consumption of electricity generated by fossil fuels. On the other hand, research into silicone thin film coatings could produce coatings which could be applied to windows as a glazing material. The window would then function as a tint and convert sunlight into electricity.
Wind power is similar in that research into the technology and the construction of wind farms could be beneficial to both engineers and land owners, particularly if the land was farm land.
Wave power would create more jobs in marine technology and engineering sector. Both the wind and wave power generation could also create jobs in research, since both require experts in the field of aerodynamics.
As you can see, the benefits of investing in green technology to India are numerous, since India has the required manpower for these investments. Yet it perplexes me as to why they would enter an agreement with Pakistan (which actively provides anti-India terror cells a safe haven) to construct an pipeline which would transport oil from Iran. The money spent could be used to create these green jobs for thousands, if not millions of engineers, technicians, and scientists, not to mention the labors employed in constructing relevant infrastructures.
I could think of only one reason: corruption. It would seem that big oil companies in India stand to lose the most had India embarked on a serious drive to green the country, plus at a time of high oil prices, these are the people who would buy a politician's conviction to side with them, wrong though it maybe. Not to mention the automakers like Tata.
Yet again, India is being undone by corruption.
Update on Mumbai attacks!
It would seem that the attacks on Mumbai last night was perpetrated by home grown insurgents. In my last post Terror Strikes!, I mentioned that it would not surprise me if this was true. At the time of writing this blog entry, CNN reports that a previously unknown group called Deccan Mujahideen assumed responsibility for Wednesday's attacks. As with previous such groups, their motive was to demand the release of their mujahideen brothers from the Indian Mujahideen, which declared an open war against India for prosecuting Muslims in the country for the past 60 years and their support for US policies. These motives, as usual, defies logic and rationality.
Well let's start with the prosecution of Muslims in the country. This is a ridiculous if not outright stupid. No one's disputing that there haven't been any communal violence during the last sixty years of India's existence. But then again, there have been communal violence throughout the world in any multi-religious society, even in the United States of America, the leader of the free world. The reasons for the communal violence are plenty, but it boils down to corruption (as I've said in my previous posting on the subject). Maybe the mujahids think that this is another Yugoslavia, and certainly there have been sporadic communal violence with looks that way, but it isn't. Rarely the violence spread nationwide. Besides, with the economic boom of the past decade, there are numerous Muslims in the country who were successful because of the opportunity they've received as an Indian.
As for the second part of their motive, which US policy do you think India supports? The Iraqi invasion? Or the threat of war aimed at Iran? Maybe it's the Israel's occupation of Palestine? Or their fight against the Somali pirates?
India did not support any of the above US policies. Even if it did, it is in India's strategic interest (Iranian oil and trade with Dubai) to see the above conflicts resolve peacefully. India did not take part in the invasion of Iraq, yet it did participate in the reconstruction process. Was that evil, helping out a country subjected to more than a decade of punitive sanctions?
Yes India is forging greater co-operation with Israel, but at the same time India's relations Iran is warm and cordial. India has stated repeatedly that the conflict in Palestine should be resolved through the peace process, not violence. As for Iran, even India was reluctant to side with the US to impose stricter sanctions against it.
The only mistake India did during the last 60 years was ceding half of Kashmir to Pakistan. Its first Prime Minister, Jawarhal Nehru did so in the interest of friendship, and yet, had to endure three wars and numerous terrorists attacks from Pakistani based groups. India knows that it is imperative to resolve the Kashmir issue as soon as possible for its own security. Yet as always Pakistan offers olive branch to India with its right hand while brandishes its AK-47 with its left hand at peace conferences.
So take note, mujahids. Your on the wrong side of history. India's response to attacks on its soil has been one of judicious response. Maybe New Delhi should start sending its special forces to Israel, learn the ropes of counter terrorism from Mossad. I seriously recommend it. Maybe then, India could seriously combat these criminals and thugs.
Well let's start with the prosecution of Muslims in the country. This is a ridiculous if not outright stupid. No one's disputing that there haven't been any communal violence during the last sixty years of India's existence. But then again, there have been communal violence throughout the world in any multi-religious society, even in the United States of America, the leader of the free world. The reasons for the communal violence are plenty, but it boils down to corruption (as I've said in my previous posting on the subject). Maybe the mujahids think that this is another Yugoslavia, and certainly there have been sporadic communal violence with looks that way, but it isn't. Rarely the violence spread nationwide. Besides, with the economic boom of the past decade, there are numerous Muslims in the country who were successful because of the opportunity they've received as an Indian.
As for the second part of their motive, which US policy do you think India supports? The Iraqi invasion? Or the threat of war aimed at Iran? Maybe it's the Israel's occupation of Palestine? Or their fight against the Somali pirates?
India did not support any of the above US policies. Even if it did, it is in India's strategic interest (Iranian oil and trade with Dubai) to see the above conflicts resolve peacefully. India did not take part in the invasion of Iraq, yet it did participate in the reconstruction process. Was that evil, helping out a country subjected to more than a decade of punitive sanctions?
Yes India is forging greater co-operation with Israel, but at the same time India's relations Iran is warm and cordial. India has stated repeatedly that the conflict in Palestine should be resolved through the peace process, not violence. As for Iran, even India was reluctant to side with the US to impose stricter sanctions against it.
The only mistake India did during the last 60 years was ceding half of Kashmir to Pakistan. Its first Prime Minister, Jawarhal Nehru did so in the interest of friendship, and yet, had to endure three wars and numerous terrorists attacks from Pakistani based groups. India knows that it is imperative to resolve the Kashmir issue as soon as possible for its own security. Yet as always Pakistan offers olive branch to India with its right hand while brandishes its AK-47 with its left hand at peace conferences.
So take note, mujahids. Your on the wrong side of history. India's response to attacks on its soil has been one of judicious response. Maybe New Delhi should start sending its special forces to Israel, learn the ropes of counter terrorism from Mossad. I seriously recommend it. Maybe then, India could seriously combat these criminals and thugs.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Why the US government should have bailed out the middle class instead
The recent spate of banks (not to mention the Automakers) rushing to the Treasury should be discouraged by President-elect Obama. Why? For one thing, these banks collapsed because ordinary people who obtained the sub-prime mortgage in the first place were unable to meet their obligation, thus the banks losing their income. The in-coming President should instead offer loans to these borrowers to repay their mortgage (with interests).
And how would they repay their loan? Well that's where Obama's health care plan could take off. Instead of repaying the government, borrowers should instead be forced to purchase health care insurance for themselves and their family. Obama then could reduce the burden of American companies by reducing their contribution to workers' health care.
Obama's tax plan could save the middle class enough money to contribute more to their families' health care or increase their purchasing power. That would bring much needed relief to the local economy already reeling with low consumer spending.
President-elect Obama could then concentrate on pulling troops out of Iraq, hunt Osama bin Laden and his troops, create more jobs to replace those out-sourced, invest in green technology and bring peace to the Middle East.
As for the banks who issued this sub-prime mortgages in the first place, it would be wise for them to resist the temptation of making cheap money in the future. Nor should they securitize mortgages to make a quick buck.
And how would they repay their loan? Well that's where Obama's health care plan could take off. Instead of repaying the government, borrowers should instead be forced to purchase health care insurance for themselves and their family. Obama then could reduce the burden of American companies by reducing their contribution to workers' health care.
Obama's tax plan could save the middle class enough money to contribute more to their families' health care or increase their purchasing power. That would bring much needed relief to the local economy already reeling with low consumer spending.
President-elect Obama could then concentrate on pulling troops out of Iraq, hunt Osama bin Laden and his troops, create more jobs to replace those out-sourced, invest in green technology and bring peace to the Middle East.
As for the banks who issued this sub-prime mortgages in the first place, it would be wise for them to resist the temptation of making cheap money in the future. Nor should they securitize mortgages to make a quick buck.
Terror Strikes!
News channels report of terror attacks in Mumbai yesterday. Police say attacks are carried out by Muslim terrorists. I say big deal! In a country like India, you're gonna get lots of shit from lots of disenfranchised people - from the low caste dalits, the farmers who were sold out by their government, to the Christians, Sikhs and last but not least, Muslims.
The Indian government could not be more mired in bureaucratic haywire when it comes to internal security. With a police infamous for being corrupt, let alone incompetent, the problem has existed for decades. It's hard to overcome these corruption, which basically occurs more frequently at the state governments - governed by corrupt Chief Ministers the federal government (i.e. the Prime Minister) basically rely on for political expediency. These Chief Ministers gain valuable voters' sympathy by flaming communal sentiments, to the point of inciting violence, just so to get the necessary votes to stay in power. The police are powerless to disobey them, since they could be reassigned (I rather prefer the term disciplined) by the central government eager to please their regional allies. Some police officers would even join in the communal fray at the behest of their political masters. Even if it occasioned for the prosecution of these corrupt officials, the judiciary in turn would be influenced to dismiss, or at the very least, dispense minimum sentences against these corrupt and vile politicians.
Some may wonder about the justice system. Well let me say that it does not exist at all! It's just a mirage to lure foreign investors, since some judges were known to illicit money or sex just to tilt the outcome in your favor.
Each time India achieves something remarkable, like recent the launch of the probe intended to study the moon, I wonder how many farmers had to commit suicide this year just because they could not afford to meet their loan obligations due to failed crops. Which reminds me that the failure of Tata to acquire land from farmers to produce was a victory not only for the farmers, but also for environmentalists who see the cheap car project as a burden to an already polluted air in India's major cities. Having said that, as an astute observer of Indian politics, I wouldn't be surprised if Tata bought these land with the tacit approval of the government - since any approval of these agricultural land for corporations would ensure the Chief Ministers would obtain valuable contracts for their sons and daughters. All these at the expense of the poor.
For a country which pride itself as the next superpower, it still treats its female population as worst than animals, with female infanticide the norm among even middle class families. Violence against women even occurs in some wealthy families, with in-laws the usual perpetrators.
Let's face it. If India's to achieve something meaningful, the political, judicial system should be overhauled to ensure accountability and independence. The tribalism practiced throughout the country should be abolished, in essence, an overhaul of certain traditions which is incompatible to India's stated ambition as the next superpower. Besides these caste based politics only impedes the political and judicial reform craved by the middle class. Once this is done the country could then embark on an economic reform which should be more inclusive to the 300 million of its population living below the poverty line. Until then, I think it would be wise if India could scale back these expensive, non-viable technological mambo-jumbo that benefits just a select few.
An economically and politically stable India would then be able dispense with the terror cells operating within its own border.
The Indian government could not be more mired in bureaucratic haywire when it comes to internal security. With a police infamous for being corrupt, let alone incompetent, the problem has existed for decades. It's hard to overcome these corruption, which basically occurs more frequently at the state governments - governed by corrupt Chief Ministers the federal government (i.e. the Prime Minister) basically rely on for political expediency. These Chief Ministers gain valuable voters' sympathy by flaming communal sentiments, to the point of inciting violence, just so to get the necessary votes to stay in power. The police are powerless to disobey them, since they could be reassigned (I rather prefer the term disciplined) by the central government eager to please their regional allies. Some police officers would even join in the communal fray at the behest of their political masters. Even if it occasioned for the prosecution of these corrupt officials, the judiciary in turn would be influenced to dismiss, or at the very least, dispense minimum sentences against these corrupt and vile politicians.
Some may wonder about the justice system. Well let me say that it does not exist at all! It's just a mirage to lure foreign investors, since some judges were known to illicit money or sex just to tilt the outcome in your favor.
Each time India achieves something remarkable, like recent the launch of the probe intended to study the moon, I wonder how many farmers had to commit suicide this year just because they could not afford to meet their loan obligations due to failed crops. Which reminds me that the failure of Tata to acquire land from farmers to produce was a victory not only for the farmers, but also for environmentalists who see the cheap car project as a burden to an already polluted air in India's major cities. Having said that, as an astute observer of Indian politics, I wouldn't be surprised if Tata bought these land with the tacit approval of the government - since any approval of these agricultural land for corporations would ensure the Chief Ministers would obtain valuable contracts for their sons and daughters. All these at the expense of the poor.
For a country which pride itself as the next superpower, it still treats its female population as worst than animals, with female infanticide the norm among even middle class families. Violence against women even occurs in some wealthy families, with in-laws the usual perpetrators.
Let's face it. If India's to achieve something meaningful, the political, judicial system should be overhauled to ensure accountability and independence. The tribalism practiced throughout the country should be abolished, in essence, an overhaul of certain traditions which is incompatible to India's stated ambition as the next superpower. Besides these caste based politics only impedes the political and judicial reform craved by the middle class. Once this is done the country could then embark on an economic reform which should be more inclusive to the 300 million of its population living below the poverty line. Until then, I think it would be wise if India could scale back these expensive, non-viable technological mambo-jumbo that benefits just a select few.
An economically and politically stable India would then be able dispense with the terror cells operating within its own border.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Wenger's gamble
Arsene Wenger finally did it. After months of haranguing by the media, he finally stripped the captaincy from William Gallas, their eccentric defender and skipper since Thierry Henry depart the club for Barcelona.
The problems with Gallas were prominent in the eyes of observers even before he arrived at Ashburton Grove. His infamous threat to score an own goal at Stamford Bridge if Chelsea did not allow him a move to Emirates should have been an omen to Wenger. Such player should not have been allowed into a team in the first place - since he's bound to disrespect the team sooner or later. Which in this case proved to be later than thought, surprisingly.
Yet Wenger had to bolster his failing defense, for he had begun his youth revolution, having let go of such heavy weights as Robert Pires, Freddie Ljungberg, Ray Parlour, Martin Keown and most of all Patrick Viera - the indomitable captain whose presence gave their opponents a tough time in midfield. In the absence of these veterans, Wenger was forced to rely heavily on Gilberto, the aging Brazillian veteran of several World Cup Campaigns. There was Lauren at right back, Kolo Toure at the center, Gael Clichy at left. Of the three, Lauren had to go when persistent injuries gave the younger Bacary Sagna a chance at right back, and he flourished. Out went Lauren.
The only option for Wenger was Gallas.
Having arrived at Emirates in August 2006, Arsenal lost eight league games, and in the process, conceded 35 goals, collecting a dismal total of 68 points throughout the entire season.
His second season started with him taking up the captaincy from the departing Henry. He led Arsenal to third in the league, four points off eventual winners Manchester United. But that particular season was controversial for Gallas, at least that is how Fleet Street pictures it.
Gallas received scathing criticism during the game which saw Eduardo's leg broken due to a horrific tackle by Martin Taylor. Gallas went on to protest the tackle, in the process displaying some antics that had people questioning his leadership skills.
This season had not been kind to Arsenal nor to Gallas. Their defensive frailties were there to exploit by likes of Fulham, Hull City, Stoke, Aston Villa, and last, but not least, Manchester City. Worst still, their arch nemesis, Tottenham Hostpur under the guidance of Harry Redknapp, were able to rip open their defense, forcing Arsenal to an eight goal thriller at Emirates. That was Spurs best performance against their eternal north London rival. That was Arsenal's worst performance so far this season, never mind the drubbing they got from Manchester City last week.
The point is, Gallas was erratic at best, a clown at worst as Arsenal's captain. He had neither the skills required to skipper a football team nor does he have the confidence of his team mates at the dressing room. That last bit proved to his undoing when he publicly chastise Theo Walcott, Samir Nasri, Robin van Persie among others for their lack of commitment.
Wenger had to respond in a stern manner that would send signal to others that he would not tolerate such public display of antics.
Hence, we now have captain Cesc Fabregas - infamous for the Pizza Gate scandal a couple of seasons back - at helm. Only time will tell if this gamble would work for Arsene Wenger's Arsenal - and not too soon. Their next Premier League match: at Stamford Bridge against Chelsea, no less!
The problems with Gallas were prominent in the eyes of observers even before he arrived at Ashburton Grove. His infamous threat to score an own goal at Stamford Bridge if Chelsea did not allow him a move to Emirates should have been an omen to Wenger. Such player should not have been allowed into a team in the first place - since he's bound to disrespect the team sooner or later. Which in this case proved to be later than thought, surprisingly.
Yet Wenger had to bolster his failing defense, for he had begun his youth revolution, having let go of such heavy weights as Robert Pires, Freddie Ljungberg, Ray Parlour, Martin Keown and most of all Patrick Viera - the indomitable captain whose presence gave their opponents a tough time in midfield. In the absence of these veterans, Wenger was forced to rely heavily on Gilberto, the aging Brazillian veteran of several World Cup Campaigns. There was Lauren at right back, Kolo Toure at the center, Gael Clichy at left. Of the three, Lauren had to go when persistent injuries gave the younger Bacary Sagna a chance at right back, and he flourished. Out went Lauren.
The only option for Wenger was Gallas.
Having arrived at Emirates in August 2006, Arsenal lost eight league games, and in the process, conceded 35 goals, collecting a dismal total of 68 points throughout the entire season.
His second season started with him taking up the captaincy from the departing Henry. He led Arsenal to third in the league, four points off eventual winners Manchester United. But that particular season was controversial for Gallas, at least that is how Fleet Street pictures it.
Gallas received scathing criticism during the game which saw Eduardo's leg broken due to a horrific tackle by Martin Taylor. Gallas went on to protest the tackle, in the process displaying some antics that had people questioning his leadership skills.
This season had not been kind to Arsenal nor to Gallas. Their defensive frailties were there to exploit by likes of Fulham, Hull City, Stoke, Aston Villa, and last, but not least, Manchester City. Worst still, their arch nemesis, Tottenham Hostpur under the guidance of Harry Redknapp, were able to rip open their defense, forcing Arsenal to an eight goal thriller at Emirates. That was Spurs best performance against their eternal north London rival. That was Arsenal's worst performance so far this season, never mind the drubbing they got from Manchester City last week.
The point is, Gallas was erratic at best, a clown at worst as Arsenal's captain. He had neither the skills required to skipper a football team nor does he have the confidence of his team mates at the dressing room. That last bit proved to his undoing when he publicly chastise Theo Walcott, Samir Nasri, Robin van Persie among others for their lack of commitment.
Wenger had to respond in a stern manner that would send signal to others that he would not tolerate such public display of antics.
Hence, we now have captain Cesc Fabregas - infamous for the Pizza Gate scandal a couple of seasons back - at helm. Only time will tell if this gamble would work for Arsene Wenger's Arsenal - and not too soon. Their next Premier League match: at Stamford Bridge against Chelsea, no less!
First take
I've been thinking of a place to pen my thoughts - a sort of blank canvas to paint my emotions and take on this gargantuan stage we know as planet earth. It's been a while since I've done so anyhow. But as the saying goes, better late than never (cliche, I know).
I do not know how my life would unfold, nor would I know what the road ahead would be like, yet for some reason the only way I could move on is this - blogging. In some way I'm still finding my feet in this world of ours, having crawled on it on all fours, learning the ropes - at times, forced to re-learn them over and over again.
So here I am, taking my first small steps, hoping to make that giant leap soon, with all the earnestness of an eager-beaver.
Wish me luck.
I do not know how my life would unfold, nor would I know what the road ahead would be like, yet for some reason the only way I could move on is this - blogging. In some way I'm still finding my feet in this world of ours, having crawled on it on all fours, learning the ropes - at times, forced to re-learn them over and over again.
So here I am, taking my first small steps, hoping to make that giant leap soon, with all the earnestness of an eager-beaver.
Wish me luck.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
