I’ve had several discussions with my friends about the death penalty. I found a site on the death penalty and its statistics. It seems that lethal injection is the execution method of choice, with alternatives if the death row inmate so chooses (Methods of Execution). Nebraska only executes by electrocution. Ouch. Burnt flesh. I remember watching Green Mile, and it was pretty horrific. There have been botched execution attempts as the prisoners needed multiple jolts to be killed. From the website, I noticed that lethal injection didn’t have a 100% quick kill rate either. Here is a site with Botched Executions since 1982. Scroll down to the recent ones. You would have thought they would have a fool-proof execution method by now. That’s not even the point.

For a forgiving religion, Christianity certainly makes a lot of exceptions. I’ve been given Genesis 9:6 (Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man) as an example. The current reasoning goes as “Eye for an Eye”. What the hell?! Are we freaking barbarians? I don’t know how “civilized” executions are. The same people who raise a storm about public executions in countries like Saudi Arabia, still condone executions in the US. What a friggin’ double standard.

People who support the death penalty use economics to counter life with no parole. They don’t want their tax payer’s money to be funding the survival of a murderer. It’s free food, free room, and free room to exercise. The prisoners are akin to animals in the zoo minus spectators. I guess it’s a valid argument, and it would seem economically favorable to execute the prisoners versus keeping him alive till they die a natural death. However, I have also been informed that it takes a decent amount of money for the process of execution. I need to verify that. Here is the website about the costs of death penalty.

Would starvation be a method of execution? Slow, painful. So, solitary confinement, without food. That’s inhumane, right? Inhumane compared to a quick death? How much of money would be spent in that chain of events?

Now to realistic alternative that would be developed eventually for maximal efficiency: Brainwashing, cognitive reprogramming, psychological reconditioning. I don’t think we have technology to achieve that now, but couldn’t a brutal person be made docile and useful by reprogramming? So, instead of execution, just change the person and put them to constructive use. Who knows, the diabolical genius could be a genius in other fronts too.. What’s future?

Anyway, what do you guys think?

Technorati Tags: Death, Executions, USA, Policy, Religion, Opinion, Crime, Prisons, Justice, Morality, Life, Death Penalty, Life Imprisonment

Go figure , I do have opinions about the usage of wars to eliminate macro-problems like terrorism. Hank’s post on Talks and Appeasement Bring War - War Brings Peace, but Liberals Never Learn That turned out to be a great spot for a discussion. To save time, I’m going to quote what started the debate, and then go on to list our thoughts and comments.

“The fact that native-born Muslim Europeans are committing terror acts within their own countries shows that this Islamist malignancy long predates Iraq, long predates Afghanistan and long predates 9/11. What Europe had incubated is an enemy within, a threat that for decades Europe simply refused to face.

I say:

I don’t think the EU is waiting out for the Islamic terrorist storm to pass over. This is a threat that needs to be eliminated now. Terrorism not only affects people’s lives, but it is bad for the economy. Until it is rooted out of existence, I wouldn’t want to invest in anything that is a potential terror target.

However that doesn’t mean full scale war on nations. It means a more pointed attack rather than brute force. It calls for finesse.

For my curiousity, could you point to one liberal, who says “Terrorism is inevitable, so I am going to sit back and let them get to me, and kill me?”. When you talk about Liberal appeasers, that question is what come to mind. If it were me, I would ask for more efficient anti-terrorism tactics than spend hundreds of billions of dollars, on wars.

Hank Dagny Says:

If you have a better solution for solving conflicts than war, Joy, the world would be all ears.
No one has found one yet. Winner dictates surrender to loser - then there is peace. Liberals who fail to learn this history lesson are basically sitting back hoping they get killed last. That is Winston’s point.

Appeasement, bribes, negotiating, talking, truces, treaties, resolutions, sanctions and threats of sanctions always produce nothing and just delay the inevitable - which now costs more as the time wasted on liberal attempts to prevent war, allowed the aggressor more time to get stronger.
The US military is playing ‘pinpoint attack’, which is why there is still pockets of resistance. Total and complete annihilaton of key areas would of ended all fighting months ago. Maybe even saved lives compared to now.

Now I understand your desire for a non-war solution to maniacs who want to kill all infidels. Heck, I would like one too. If you have one, let’s read it.
You want to eliminate it without war. Tell us how?

I say:

If I had a better idea, I would be in politics exercising those ideas. There is a reason why we elect people to run the administration. We think they are qualified to make sound decisions, without snap judgement. They are paid to think outside the box. War may not be easy on human life, but is the easy way out of a tough situation.

Speaking about wars being the best solution, do you suggest India and Pakistan solve their conflict with a war? Are you advocating a method of solving a problem that involves losses in millions of lives and billions of dollars?

The problem with fighting a war here is that we are not fighting a nation, but rather an organization. They don’t just quit after surrender. An example is the continued terrorism occuring even after the Afganisthan war. Do you see that solving terrorism problems? In the process, an entire nation was destroyed, by devastating their critical infrastructure. The same thing is happening in Iraq. How are they to run their economy when it is unsafe to invest it that economy?

I don’t think treaties cost more money. Would a peaceful negotiation cost in the hundreds of billions of dollars? I don’t think so. When politicians go for war, in my mind, they have failed at their jobs (diplomacy). If wars were the answer for every conflict, then the military should run the government, as politics is riddled with conflicts.

US military is not playing pinpoint attack. I don’t think the Afganisthan and Iraq wars were pin point. The collateral damage in your solution scenario is tremendous. That is just not acceptable. For a nation of life-loving people, pro-life supporters, that is a horrid double standard. Is the life of civilians there less worthy than life in the US?

There is a reason why intelligence gets money to do what they do. They are supposed to provide information, to facilitate isolating and nullifying threats.

While we are talking about terrorism, I can’t seem to understand why terrorists hate the West so much. Is it because of the lifestyle? Religion? I am more inclined to think of cultural imperialism and foreign policies that are detrimental to their people. There is no justification for killing people in name of terrorism. Terrorists are cowardly criminals on get some kind of rush out of killing innocent people. And then, there are those brainwashed, and incapable of thinking through their decisions.

I say, the best solution is evening the gap between economic classes. Poverty, and desperation is a primal cause to try to appease the conditions. People resort to violence to get their points across. I think our society with such powerful religious influences is inherently screwed up.

That would be a reason why I advocate for a secular society. That would eliminate terrorism based on religious values..

Hank Dagny Says:

You are a classic liberal who ignores human history, human behavior and therefore human mental illness. I say this not to be insulting - but as a point of fact.

You expect elected leaders to be smarter than everyone who ever lived. They are not.

You expect governments to fix all the world’s problems. They do not.

You expect treaties to bring about peace. They never have.

You expect fanatics - whether religious, facist, communist or dictatorial - to act civilized. They cannot.

And you expect the world and life to be fair, even and nice. It never will be.

You also blame religion, poverty and desperation for the world’s woes. The world’s woes are from oppression - whether it is religious or governmental. Individual and capitalistic freedom is at it’s greatest on the planet in the United States. That is why we are the world’s lone super power - because of individual and capitalistic freedom.

You want world socialism. Socialism spreads misery evenly - except for the ‘leaders’. Capitalism spreads happiness unevenly, but everyone has a chance to do the best they can.

I’ll take a chance at the gold over a promise of misery. You have to be mentally defective to take the other option. But liberals do.

Hank Dagny Says:

Fourputt and Joy, I am calm and I said I was not being insulting. Liberals just don’t have a logic or common sense bone.

Let’s look at facts. All of Joy’s statements are wishes or failed policies - multiple centuries of failed policies. But liberals hang on to a fantasy - not real world.

Diplomacy has never worked. Name one time it did.

She, like all liberals, want to know why the terrorists hate us. Why worry about why? They want you and me dead. That is all I need to know. But if you want to know the reason we both have to die Joy, is because I am even having this discussion with you. You are a slut for talking to me and I am an infidel for not controlling women - penalty for both of us is death.

By the way Joy, I am not advocating for war. It is just what is needed to reach peace. The enemy wants to wipe out Israel and kill all infidels. You talk to them, pay ransom and live in fear and slavery. I choose to kill them before they kill me.

I say:

You bring up good points. Humans are by design, or evolution, a flawed species, in pursuit of living and surviving. That is a primal instinct. When that is messed with, it provokes a reaction. However, I don’t think we are that primal anymore. If we are, our intelligence is wasted. We should be able to exercise restraint to mollify conflicts. Yes, that’s a wish, but it is not an unreasonable one. When the fighting is restricted to military zones, and doesn’t involve major collateral damage, that’s a righteous war. However, when civilian casualities are not taken seriously, that’s callousness. Terrorists are cowards to use civilians as shields, but we are more evolved than them, and need to take the innocent civilians who will be killed into consideration.

If the elected leaders are not smart, why do we elect them? You mean to say that any ordinary person can become a politician without qualifications. If that is true, I feel sorry for what Politics has turned into.

Governments are created to solve problems on a macro scale. If they don’t, they are failures.

If we solve every problem with fighting, there won’t be much to live for. I, for one, don’t want to live in a world devastated by human primality. I have more faith in the human race than to think we are still barbarians.

To deal with barbarians and fanatics, do we turn into them too? Yes, terrorists are cowards and need to be eliminated to keep world peace, but at the current mode of dealing with them, more terrorists are being created.

I don’t except world to be fair, but I assume we have come a long way in our 3000 years of intelligent evolution. Disease is not fair. Death is not fair. Life isn’t fair. But we deal with it in civilized and logical manner. War is not civilized. It is utterly barbaric. If people want to stoop to that level, that’s their perojective.

About oppression, you made my point. And US will not be the lone superpower at the way the current global economy is playing out. China is set to become a global superpower, if it has not become one already.. Yeah, capitalism is the reason for the rise of China and India in the global economy.

I don’t want socialism but we need public welfare. It is not fair to us who earn our money, but it is the way the world is. That’s being realistic. We can’t let a significant portion of our population die while we live in luxury..

If diplomacy has never worked, why do all the countries still have diplomatic missions in other countries?

Hank Dagny Says:

Governments are not constructed to solve problems. They are constructed to protect it’s citizens.

World problems have only been solved by fighting. There has never been a cease-fire or treaty that has lasted.

A cease-fire is only granted by the good guys (US and Israel), asked for by the bad guys (the UN and our enemies), which allows the bad guys time to recover and re-arm, and then the bad guys break the cease-fire again.

This happens time and time again and only liberals and peaceniks ignore this FACT.

China will not be a super-power until their communist government falls. Then, as capitalists, why fight their best customer - the United States? Shooting your customer is just bad business.

You do want socialism if you want public welfare. They are the same pig except one sounds like it is in a dress. Churches and charities are more than capable of helping the truly needy - and I would be glad to give. People who want their government to hand out the goodies - and obviously want the government to have the power to take from citizens to be able to do it - are by definition socialists at the very least and communists in all probability.

Technorati Tags: China, History, Opinion, Peace, Politics, Terrorism, Diplomacy, Government, Poverty, Socialism, Capitalism, Charity, Taxes

Congress targets social-networking sites | CNET News.com

Most of this news piece deals with Congress deliberating about mandating records being stored about users by social networking sites and ISPs. The activity logs are supposed to help counter child pornography/abuse, and terrorism.

A couple of suggestions to counter the child abuse on social networking sites such as Myspace has been offered. However, I do not think that restricting access to such sites in libraries and schools are the answer. It’s is not a solution, it’s a work around that is bound to fail. If people in China can circumvent their national firewall (Golden Shield aka Great Firewall of China), what makes you think that can’t happen in the US? Computer technology enthusiasts hate road blocks like this, and are bound to retaliate.

I see one advantage of logging IP addresses of users during registration, and usage. It can be used to isolate addresses and then cross-reference those addresses to the sexual predators list of addresses. One kink I see in this, is the use of public internet access points, to circumvent this type of snooping.

It is practically impossible to know if the person is lying during registration. If I am mistaken, correct me with a detailed rebuke. It’s as easy for sexual predators to lie about their ages, as it is for a minor to lie about their age. Right now, short of loss of absolute privacy, there is no way to combat this problem comprehensively.

It is not the fault of the social networking sites that some of the users are depraved. One analogy to this issue I can think of are guns and people. Just because there is a massive illegal market for guns doesn’t stop the gun manufactures from selling guns. This is because people with licenses and right to own guns, create the demand. It’s the same case here. People who use the social networking site judiciously and ethically should not be penalized for the actions of depraved individuals. I would be mad if I was blocked from Facebook or Myspace due to the actions of someone else.

Technorati Tags: information, internet, Opinion, Policy, privacy, USA, social networking, myspace, facebook, china

From Wondermark

This strip is funny but I actually agree with it. I think they really want to inconvenience the western countries rather than kill people. That lives further than just mindless violence. The mere thought causes a paranoia that reigns supreme and squashes all logic and rationality.. They are winning, and we are letting them get the better of us. They play, we lose. We need to change the trend.

It is a sad state of affairs if the terror plot at British airports doesn’t scare me anymore (pictures here). It seemed second nature after the recent train bombings in India, and the constant turmoil in the Middle East. People need to understand that the Butterfly Effect is real. What happens in the Middle East affects all of us, in some subtle and some in-your-face ways.

This should dip the paranoia effect back to full throttle, and make hatemongers rejoice as one.

I suppose we should congratulate the security forces in the UK to nip this possible catastrophe in the bud. I can’t imagine how big of a financial hit this is going to be for the airlines, and the ripple effect across the next few weeks. I’m just glad that I have a confirmed flight later in August..

The weird coincidence is that I was supposed to fly to the US through Heathrow today morning. I would have been caught in this mess. God does indeed work in mysterious ways.

Technorati Tags: Islam, Terrorism, Airports, Britain, USA, Planes, Security, Bombs

This group (flickr) is about supporting Lebanon and raising awareness about the war that is occurring there.

Pictures: Every member is required to take a picture of themselves with a red cloth tied around their wrist and tape being pulled away from their lips symbolizing their support for the people of Lebanon.

read more | digg story

Read the complete article »

I don’t know if this email forward is actually true, but it’s funny to read anyway. Cheers!

These are from a Washington, D.C. travel agent with 30 years experience working with our congressmen and women. It will definitely give you pause to wonder how laws ever get passed if you didn’t already wonder!! Read on . . .(At your own risk !!)

I had a New Hampshire Congresswoman ask for an aisle seat so that her hair wouldn’t get messed up by being near the window. (Think she was blonde?)

********************************************

I got a call from a Candidate’s Staffer, who wanted to go to Capetown. I started to explain the length of the flight and the passport information then she interrupted me with, “I’m not trying to make you look stupid, but Capetown is in Massachusetts.” Without trying to make her look like the stupid one, I calmly explained, “Cape Cod is in Massachusetts, Capetown is in Africa.” Her response … (click)

********************************************

Senior Vermont Congressman called, furious about a Florida package we did. I asked what was wrong with the vacation in Orlando. He said he was expecting an ocean-view room. I tried to explain that is not possible, since Orlando is in the middle of the state. He replied, “Don’t lie to me. I looked on the map, and Florida is a very thin state!!!”

********************************************

I got a call from a Lawmakers Wife who asked, “Is it possible to see England from Canada?” I said, “No.” She said, “But they look so close on the map.”

********************************************
An aide for a Bush cabinet member once called and asked if they could rent a car in Dallas. When I pulled up the reservation, I noticed they had only a 1-hour layover in Dallas. When I asked him why he wanted to rent a car, he said, “I heard Dallas was a big airport, and we will need a car to drive between the gates to save time.”

********************************************

An Illinois Congresswoman called last week. She needed to know how it was possible that her flight from Detroit left at 8:20am and got into Chicago at 8:33am. I tried to explain that Michigan was an hour ahead of Illinois, but she could not understand the concept of time zones. Finally, I told her the plane went very fast, and she bought that!

********************************************

A New York lawmaker called and asked, “Do airlines put your physical description on your bag so they know whose luggage belongs to whom?” I said, “No, why do you ask?” She replied, “Well, when I checked in with it, they put a tag on my luggage that said (FAT), and I’m overweight, I think that is very rude?” After putting her on hold for a minute while I “looked into it” (I was actually laughing) I came back and explained the city code for Fresno, CA is (FAT), and that the airline was just putting a destination tag on her luggage.

********************************************

A Senator’s Aide called in inquiring about a trip package to Hawaii. After going over all the cost info, she asked, “Would it be cheaper to fly to California and then take the train to Hawaii?”

********************************************

I just got off the phone with a freshman Congressman who asked, “How do I know which plane to get on?” I asked him what exactly he meant, to which he replied, “I was told my flight number is 823, but none of these darn planes have numbers on them.”

********************************************

A Lady Senator called and said, “I need to fly to Pepsi-Cola, FL. Do I have to get on one of those little computer planes?” I asked if she meant fly to Pensacola, FL on a commuter plane. She said, “Yeah, whatever!!”

********************************************

A Senior Senator called and had a question about the documents he needed in order to fly to China. After a lengthy discussion about passports, I reminded him he needed a visa. “Oh no I don’t, I’ve been to China many times and never had to have one of those.” I double-checked and sure enough, his stay required a visa. When I told him this he said, “Look, I’ve been to China four times and every time they have accepted my American Express!”

********************************************

A New Mexico Congresswoman called to make reservations, “I want to go from Chicago to Rhino, New York.” the agent was at a loss for words. Finally, the agent: “Are you sure that’s the name of the town?” “Yes, what flights do you have?” replied the lady. After some searching, the agent came back with, “I’m sorry, ma’am, I’ve looked up every airport code in the country and can’t find a Rhino anywhere.” The lady retorted, “Oh don’t be silly! Everyone knows where it is. Check your map!” The agent scoured a map of the state of New York and finally offered, “You don’t mean Buffalo, do you?” “That’s it! I knew it was a big animal,” she admitted!!!

Should we be worried about the state of the union?

Technorati Tags: Humor, Politics, Jokes, Travel

This show started with a scene where Dr. Louis Guillette is riding a boat looking for alligators in the night. He started on his research on effects of endocrine disruptors when he saw changes in reproductive system of alligators. He thinks that we could extrapolate the effects of endocrine disruptors on humans by studying wildlife. At a certain level I agree with Dr. Guillette about studying wildlife regarding effects since animal testing is an integral tool of experimentation on the effects of chemicals on our physiology. He found a visible sign of endocrine disruption in affected alligators as the penis length was shorter than those which have not be affected.

Read the complete article »

India and China have been on the news for their exponential growth in the past few years. With India’s economy growing at an unprecedented 8%, are we seeing any improvement on the country on a macro-scale? Perhaps, it’s too soon to see changes. Technology and out-sourcing is the primary cause for the boom in our economy. With such a narrow cause, we are providing opportunities for a slice of India’s work force. I suppose this is good because we do produce over a million technology/engineering related graduates a year. The cream of the crop is absorbed by elite companies to enrich their employee base with talented, skilled workers to increase their profit margin. In the recent years, we have also seen an influx of employment from the medical, law and business sector, to alleviate bloated costs of foreign companies, as we provide a cheaper, yet brilliant task force for routine jobs.

However, it seems like the improvements in standards of living are purely urban, and in the upper bourgeoisie. The rural parts are still impoverished, and people die unnecessarily from lack of basic amenities and food. Agriculture is still the largest source of our income, and that has not seen the necessary change to help the farmers from difficulties. I believe that the money needs to be allocated differently, and we need to make changes in our domestic policy to alleviate the conditions of the common man. For one, we spend an obscene amount of money on Defense. Also, we need to fix our foreign policy issues related to Pakistan. A lot of our problems stem from that dispute.

The plight of the common populace of the country has not changed, and till that happens, our progress is inconsequential. We do NOT want to further alienate the poor, and create a rift between the upper and lower economic classes. Right now, the rich are getting richer, and poor are staying poor. The only improvement has been in the standard of living of youth in technology, business, medical and law job sectors. That is not right. We need an overall positive change, not segmented.

The inspiration for this post is from Pankaj Mishra’s op-ed “The Myth of New India” in NY Times.

If the op-ed is unavailable on NYT, follow the link below for the full article.

Read the complete article »

I found this 6-page questionnaire to isolate my political/economic tendencies on digg. I always thought that I was moderate politically and slightly conservative economically. However, it turns out that I’m not very conservative on economic policies.

Here is my graph coordinates, followed by comparision to other world leaders.

Economic Left/Right: -3.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.95

Read the complete article »