What I AM Thankful For in 2013.

What I AM Thankful For in 2013.


I looked back at last year's post for inspiration. Many of the sentiments I wrote about then still hold true. Yes, lots have changed in my life, personally, professionally, spiritually, and even how I look at the Hobby. It is a sign that as I get older, and my priorities change, I realize that I am still fortunate for the life I've led and for all the things that there are to look forward to. I learned a very hard lesson recently that life is too short and that the ride could end at a moment's notice. My daughter likes to say "YOLO," a lot. I have come to realize that life isn't about just doing something crazy because you might never do it again (hence the meaning...You Only Live Once). It means that you have to take life as it comes and make your choices based on the situation. Make the best (or most...or both) of it with what you have, whether you have a lot, or not so much. I have had the opportunity to be on both sides of that spectrum. It's great when you have all or most of what you need. It truly is disheartening when you don't and have to scrape by. But through it all, I am extremely grateful for the opportunities that have come my way. And hopefully, just hopefully, the best is still yet to come.

(Before I continue, I know it is, or at least has already started, so Happy Hanukkah to everyone in the Jewish community and of Jewish faith).

By the time this post comes online, my family and I will be on our way to Indiana to join my wife's family as we celebrate the Thanksgiving holiday. One of the challenges of these holidays is that there will be times where we can't be with both sides. Last year was a rare exception as both families shared Thanksgiving within driving distance. This time, not so much. While I know my family will have a wonderful dinner, I am looking forward to what my in-laws are preparing for as well.

Anyway, I can rattle on and on about how tough it is nowadays, but everyone already has an idea. For all the bad news out there (and it seems there is plenty), there is so much for me personally to be thankful for.

I am thankful that I have a wonderful family that gives me a reason to be alive. My wife and I have been together for 15 wonderful years, and I look forward to many more with her. Do we fight? Of course. All couples do. Have there been breakdowns? Yes, during our times of struggle. But though we may have had our share of disagreements, somehow the good times we've had together outweigh all the negativity. As both of us have gotten older, and as we still talk about how it would be nice if we went to this place, or if we had this car, or whatever, we still have our moments where we laugh at ourselves and wonder out loud what the heck we were thinking back then. While those dreams of travelling to exotic locales have been put off to the side for now, at least we will always have St. Louis. We finally were able to bring the kids along this time, and what an adventure just to get down there. For now, we just have to keep going with what we have. As with many who took this vow of marriage, I promised to be with her for richer or poorer, in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. I loved her then, and I love her more so now.

I am thankful for being the father of two beautiful children who I love with all my heart. I am truly grateful to have them in my life. Both are growing up to be fine individuals. And as the years go by, our children are developing way too fast. They are both figuring themselves out now and after visiting with their teachers earlier this week, I can breathe a bit easier knowing that they are at least heading in the right direction. It is just a matter of maintaining that focus and scheduling whatever time they have so that they can balance school time and their other activities. In my heart, they will always be my little babies. It's hard not to look at them and see them when they were five years younger, or even ten years. But my wife and I couldn't be happier with how they've grown to love us and each other (as pre-adolescents and teenagers do). The rules of raising them have changed. We just have to figure what those rules are as we go along. Both their mom and I still have a lot of work to do raising them, but it is something that I would never exchange.

I am thankful to have a family to lean on when times are hard. My parents, who have been my support when I have nobody to turn to when I'm having troubles and give me good advice whether I ask or not. My siblings, who keep me grounded as a person (based on whatever they're doing in their lives). When we're all together, there is just that warmth that comes with remembering who we were, the people we've become, and just enjoying each other's company. The sibling rivalries, fights, teasings, and all that comes with it still are there. But it makes for good conversation. The laughter that comes with it at times is much louder as the stories of our lives become wilder (or at least for my younger sibs). But we still have our moments, and when we get together, it is always fun (like finally camping out in Sublette with my brother and his family, my sister and her family, et. al).

I am thankful for my wife's family. They help keep my wife in check and make sure that she's doing well. Although we don't get to spend as much time with her side of the family as we'd like (everyone is busy it seems), it makes the times when all can get together much more special. When we're with them, I tend to stay back a bit. I'm more there to see my wife and children have fun. It may feel like I'm just there for the ride, but I know where I stand, and am more than happy to be a part of this family too.

I am thankful for the opportunities I've been given to broaden my horizons professionally. In 2013, working with a temp agency, I have been able to work for two very different companies. One was for a small business that is continuing to grow (Star Creations Inc), and the other, where I presently work, a very large corporation whose influence has spread worldwide (United Stationers). Though both jobs I have taken are way out of my comfort zone, I am grateful for the experiences. In fourteen years at DPI, although I had worked in a wide variety of roles, I still felt like I wasn't doing enough. What a epiphany it was when I arrived at these two places to see that there was so much more to do and that there were industries out there that I never thought about (I can assure you that I will never look at framed art at Target the same way again). I still miss the people I've worked with over the years and continue to think about them. I wish them well and pray that they have adjusted in their new lives outside of DPI.

I am thankful for having a roof over my family's head. Yes, I have to admit it's been rough at times, both financially and physically (and by this, I mean our house is old, and there has been a lot of work that needed to be done with it). Somehow we are able to scrape through another month. I've had a lot of sleepless nights, especially when I was unemployed. But through it all, I am grateful that my family still has a place to call home.

I am thankful that we have food on our table. We try not to eat out, although at times with our children's schedules it has become a necessity at times. We've had to cut back on many luxury items (seafood, steaks), but we still try to have a sense of normalcy when it comes to cooking at home, whether it's my wife cooking or me taking a turn. I'm not saying that we've had to totally give up on good food (I've tried my hand at cooking a wide variety of foods since being home more. Some were hits...others, not so much), but as long as we have the basics (milk, bread, eggs), and we're never out of pasta, I'm happy.

The final thing I am for which I am thankful, for all intents and purposes, is the reason I am able to keep sane through all the things going on in my life. It is something that many understand, but few will admit relating to it. Many people, no matter what their situation, have at least one. And often times, use it for the same reasons I do. For the goals this one thing accomplishes is not just to give joy to my life, but to give it an escape. An outlet if you will, to a time where I didn't have stress, or have much to worry. This one thing is the reason why I write this humble little blog. I give thanks to the Hobby. Because with everything going on in the world today, second to my family, it is the one thing that gives me comfort. Yes, I know that if Sitemeter is to believed, my readership is down. But I never wrote for others. I wrote it more for me. The idea of writing this blog was more for me to learn and appreciate the Hobby, and learn more about the game of baseball. I recently came to the reality that there will be a time the faces of the game will completely change. There are players who are coming up that were born after I graduated high school. Soon, there will be players who will be my children's age. There are so few players left in the game who are older than me, and most of my childhood heroes are now being considered for enshrinement into Baseball's Hall of Fame. It's funny to look at a set from 1985 set and realize that none of the players are active anymore. Heck, even the 1988 Topps Turn Back the Clock card from "Twenty-Five Years Ago" is now (as of 2013) "Fifty Years Ago." Looking back at the names in Topps Magazine from the early 1990's, many of the names of the rising stars (not the prospects) have become legends. There will be a time where I will really have to think to continue collecting or if I should stop. I can say this though...now is not the time to stop.

If this sounds like I'm whining at the same time that I'm being grateful, I apologize as that was not the intent of my writing. There are many people out there who are struggling and somehow surviving on less than what we have. To them I pray that things will get better. It will take some work, but it will get better.

If there is one thing I have forgotten to do above, it's to say thank you to those who have read my blog, left comments, accepted me into this crazy community, and have added to my card collection since I started this blog. Thank you for adding me to your blogrolls and welcoming me into your online lives. I will do my best to fill this blog with information about the Hobby and the cards that we all enjoy. After all, 2014 Topps Series I won't be out until February, and I don't plan on leaving this site hanging until then.

On behalf of my family, may you all have a wonderful Thanksgiving. Please stay safe if you are travelling this year.

Sincerely,

JayBee Anama

The Devastating Truth DRINK

The Devastating Truth DRINK


DRINK, The Intimate Relationship Between Women and Alcohol
by Ann Dowsett Johnston, could be the most controversial book of our age.
Startling in its clarity, Johnston shines a halogen light on a subject that few
people seem willing to talk about. DRINK, in the short of it, is about the
frightening rise of alcoholism among women and the way alcohol affects them,
their lives, their families and how it has already begun affecting the next
generation. This issue is not a sleeping giant, but a ravenous, insatiable
coyote, greedy as the grave.Johnstons careful brushstrokes of her own personal battle with
alcoholism, paint a painful and terrifying picture of what is going on all over
the civilized world. She blends candid interviews from alcoholic women in all
walks of life, along with some eye opening, keep you up at night facts from the
marketing aspect.
In this book, you will see a woman you know, or several. You may, as I
did, see yourself. I believe the adage, the truth will set you free. Find out
what drives women to alcoholism and the marketing campaigns that target them.
It is possible to be informed and make changes. The rise of alcoholism in women
promises to be one of the most devastating to ever plague the civilized world
and if you dont believe me, get a copy and see for yourself. I cant recommend
this book enough.Additionally, if you have concerns, click here. NCADDThis book was given to me free by the Amazon Vine program in exchange for my honest opinion.

Programming a million core machine

Programming a million core machine


I have just attended an
excellent talk by Steve Furber, Professor of Computer Engineering at
University of Manchester on the challenges on programming a million
core machine as part of the SpiNNaker project.The
SpiNNaker project has been in existence for around 15 years and has
been attempting to answer two fundamental questions:
How
does the brain do what it does? Can massively parallel computing
accelerate our understanding of the brain?
How
can our (increasing) understanding of the brain help us create more
efficient, parallel and fault-tolerant computation?The
comparison of a parallel computer with a brain is not accidental since brains share many of the required attributes being massively
parallel, have lots of interconnections, provide excellent
power-efficiency, require low speed communications, is
adaptable/fault-tolerant (of failure) and capable of learning autonomously.The
challenges for computing as Moore's law progresses is that there will
eventually come a time when further increases in speed will not be
possible and as processing speed has increased, energy efficiency has become
an increasingly important characteristic to address. The future is
therefore parallel but the approach to handling this is far from clear.
The SpiNNaker project has been established to attempt to model a
brain (around 1% of a human brain) using approximately 1 million
mobile phone chips with efficient asynchronous interconnections whilst alsoexaminingthe approach todeveloping efficient parallel applications.The
project is built on 3 core principles:
The
topology is virtualised and is as generic as possible. The physical
and logical connectivity are decoupled.
There
is no global synchronisation between the processing elements.
Energy
frugality such that that cost of a processor is zero (removing the
need for load balancing) and the energy usage of each processor is
minimised.[As
an aside, energy efficient computing is a growing interest such that
when a program is constructed, how much energy is required to
complete the computation is now the key factor in many systems (in
terms of operational cost)]The
SpiNNaker project has designed a node which contains two chips; one
chip is used for processing and consists of 18 ARM processors (1
hosts the operating system, 16 are used for application execution and
1 is spare) and the other chip is for memory (SDRAM). The nodes are
connected in a 2D-mesh due to simplicity and cost. 48 nodes are
assembled onto a PCB such that 864 processors are available per
board. The processor only supports integer computation. The major
innovation in the design is the interconnectivity within a node and
between nodes on a board, A simple packet switched network is used to
send very small packets around; each node has a router which is used
to efficiently send the packets either within the node or to a
neighbouring node. Ultimately, 24 PCBs are housed within a single 19”
rack which are then housed (5) within a cabinet such that each
cabinet has 120 PCBs which equates to 5760 nodes or 103680
processors. 10 cabinets would therefore result in over 1 million
processors and would require around 10KW. A host machine (running
Linux) is connected via Ethernet to the cabinet (and optionally each
board).Networking
(and is efficiency) is the key challenge to emulate neurons. The
approach by Spinnaker is to capture a simple spike (representing a
neuron communication) within a small packet (40 bits) and then
multicast this data around (each neuron is allocated a unique
identifier, there is a theoretical limit of 4 billion neurons which
can be modelled). By the use of a 3-stage associative memory holding
some simple routing information, the destination of each event can be
determined. If the table does not contain an entry, the packet is
simply passed through to the next router. This approach is ideally
suited to a static network or a (very) slowly changing network. It
struck me that this simple approach could be very useful in efficient
communication across the internet and maybe useful for meeting
the challenge of the 'Internet of Things'.Developing
applications for SpiNNaker requires that the problem is split into
two parts; one part handles the connectivity graph between nodes; the
other part handles the conventional computing cycle with compile/link
and deploy. Whilst the performance in terms of throughput is
impressive (250 Gbps for 1024 links), it is the throughput which is
exceptional at over 10 Billion packets/second.The
programming approach is to use an event-driven programming paradigm
which discourages single-threaded execution. Each node runs a single
application with the applications (written in C) communicating via an
API to SARK (the SpiNNaker Application Runtime Kernel) which is
hosted on the processor. The event model effectively maps to
interrupt handlers on the processor with 3 key events handled by each
application:
A
new packet (highest priority)
A
(DMA) memory transfer
A
timer event (typically 1 millisecond)As
most applications for Spinnaker have been to model the brain, most of
the applications have been written in PyNN (a python neural network)
which is then translated into code which can be hosted by SpiNNaker.
The efficiency of the interconnections mean that brain simulations
can now be executed in real-time, a significant improvement over
conventional supercomputing.
In
concluding, it is clear that whilst the focus has been on addressing
the 'science' challenges, the are clearly insights into future
computing in terms of improved inter-processor connectivity, improved
energy utilization and a flexible platform. Whilst commercial
exploitation has not been a major driving force for this project, I
am confident that some of the approaches and ideas will find a way
into main-stream computing in much the same way that 50 years ago,
Manchester developed the paging algorithm which is now commonplace in
all computing platforms.


The slides are available here.

Millions Against Monsanto Five lessons from the battle against GMOs

Millions Against Monsanto Five lessons from the battle against GMOs



Millions Against Monsanto: Five lessons from the battle against GMOs
Nov 11, 2013 | Organic Consumers Association | Ronnie Cummins

Twenty years after the controversial
introduction of unlabeled and untested genetically engineered foods and
crops, opposition to GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) and Monsanto
has created one of the largest netroots-grassroots movements in the U.S.


There are arguably more important issues facing us today than the battle
against Frankenfoods. The climate crisis and corporate control over the
government and media come to mind. But the rapidly growing anti-GMO
Movement illustrates the powerful synergy that can develop from the
combined use of social media, marketplace pressure and political action.
Recent developments in this sector indicate that out-of-control
corporations, media, politicians and the proverbial "one percent" can
be outsmarted and outmaneuvered. And quite possibly defeated.


In the wake of high-stakes multi-million dollar GMO labeling ballot
initiatives in California in 2012, and Washington State in 2013, an army
of organic food and natural health activists have put Corporate America
and the political elite on the defensive. We've demonstrated that
aggressive populist issue-framing; unconventional "inside-outside"
coalition-building; marketplace pressure; and online list-building,
mobilization and fundraising - strategically channeled into local and
state-based political action - can begin to even up the odds between
David and Goliath.


Here are five strategic lessons from the ongoing
battle against GMOs in the U.S, lessons that may be applicable to a
broad range of political issues.


1. Aggressive populist issue-framing works.


The desire to know what's in our food, coupled with a growing concern
for food safety and a distrust of large chemical companies, the mass
media, Congress and federal regulatory agencies, is a hot-button issue
that unites the majority of Americans - Democrats, Republicans, Greens,
Libertarians and Independents alike.


Forty percent of consumers believe that unlabeled genetically engineered
foods and crops are unsafe. Another 40 percent are unsure. These
numbers terrify large supermarket chains, biotech companies and food
corporations. So does the notion that states such as Washington,
Connecticut, Maine and Vermont will soon require mandatory labeling of
GMOs - which will likely drive these controversial foods and crops off
the market, just as labeling laws have already done in Europe.


Anti-GMO campaigners have gained the support of millions of consumers
and voters by framing food safety as a populist issue. And by
relentlessly and aggressively challenging the opposition - big-name
companies that include Monsanto, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Nestlé, General Mills
and others.


2. Unconventional "inside-outside" coalition-building builds critical mass.


After 20 years of grassroots public education and advocacy, the organic
and natural health movements, led by a hybrid coalition of non-profit
public interest groups, such as the Organic Consumers Association and
Food Democracy Now, and green businesses, including Mercola.com, Dr.
Bronner's, and Nature's Path, are approaching something like critical
mass.


Over 100 million U.S. consumers are now regularly shopping for organic
and natural foods, nutritional supplements and other products, giving
rise to a rapidly growing $80 billion-a-year market for organic and
natural products. One of the most important accomplishments of the
right-to-know, anti-GMO movement has been to unite the advocacy and
fundraising efforts of non-profit groups and health and green-minded
for-profit businesses. After 20 years of often operating on shoestring
budgets, activist groups (the "outsiders") are now increasingly joining
hands with a number of profitable organic/green/Fair Trade businesses
(the "insiders"). This inside-outside strategy has managed to raise a
not insignificant war chest of almost $20 million to support the state
GMO labeling ballot initiatives in California and Washington in 2012 and
2013, while simultaneously pressuring major brands, such as Whole Foods
Market, Trader Joe's and Chipotle, to embrace GMO labeling.


At the same time activist groups with a more radical message
("outsiders") are learning that you must, for maximum impact, work with
more moderate groups (the "insiders"), and vice-versa. This ecumenical
"inside-outside" strategy has allowed the more radical organic and
natural health groups and scientists to highlight the alarming human
health and environmental hazards of GMOs, and carry out boycotts, street
demonstrations and direct action, while the less radical campaign
groups and coalitions meanwhile appeal to a more moderate demographic
with the mainstream message that consumers have the right to know what's
in their food.


3. Marketplace pressure and political action must go hand-in-hand.


Anti-GMO campaigners have now learned that marketplace pressure and
political action go hand-in-hand. It's not enough to just vote with your
pocketbook for organic and non-GMO foods and products, to reward good
companies and brands and punish the bad ones. We must get political, and
vote for a healthy, climate-friendly food and farming system in the
voting booth as well. If we want to drive GMO foods off the market, we
must not only walk our talk in the marketplace and in our everyday
lives, but also "get political" and mobilize our base to get involved in
legislative battles and political campaigns.


One important consequence of marketplace pressure and boycotts is their
potential to gradually divide our opponents. In the case of the anti-GMO
movement, we've begun to drive a wedge between the biotech/industrial
agriculture corporations, and their erstwhile allies, food manufacturers
and supermarket chains. In the wake of the California GMO labeling
ballot initiative (Proposition 37), the Organic Consumers Association
and our allies launched a nationwide boycott of Traitor Brands, the
organic and natural brands whose parent corporations spent $20 million,
along with the biotech industry's $30 million, to defeat Prop 37. We
sabotaged several dozen corporate Facebook pages, tarnishing brand names
such as Kashi, Cascadian Farm, Honest Tea, Naked Juice, Silk, Horizon,
and Ben and Jerry's, to depress sales. This caused several large
multinationals, including Unilever, parent company of Ben and Jerry's,
and Mars, parent company of Seeds of Change, to back off from
anti-labeling activities. Other retail and food giants, including
Wal-Mart, fearing an escalation in consumer activism, have begun lobbying the FDA to implement federal GMO food labels.


4. Sophisticated online list-building, mobilization and fundraising are key.


Anti-GMO campaigners are rapidly becoming more sophisticated in terms of
building broad coalitions, using online petitions to build large email
lists, pooling national email lists, segmenting national lists in order
to target state and local constituencies, using Facebook, Twitter and
other social media for network-building and mobilization, setting up c4
lobbying organizations to complement 501-c3 non-profit groups, and
raising funds online.


In the recent GMO ballot initiative campaigns in California and
Washington, as well as state legislative campaigns for labeling in
several dozen other states, right-to-know supporters have been able to
send coordinated or complementary email messages to over 10 million
people at once. Over the past 12 months groups like the Organic
Consumers Association, Mercola.com, Food Democracy Now, Natural News,
Alliance for Natural Health, Center for Food Safety, Just Label It,
Environmental Working Group, Cornucopia, Friends of the Earth, CREDO,
and MoveOn have been able to send out anti-GMO or pro-labeling messages
to literally millions of consumers and voters on a regular basis,
generating thousands of grassroots volunteers, organizing thousands of
local events and protests, and raising over $20 million, mainly in small
donations. The anti-GMO movement may not have the deep pockets or the
advertising and PR clout of the biotech and Big Food lobby when it comes
to the corporate media, but we are rapidly developing our own mass
media on the Internet and Facebook.


5. Local and state political action is more effective than campaigns that target federal laws and lawmakers.


The anti-GMO movement, like other social change movements, has learned
the hard way that corporations and the wealthy elite control not only
the mass media, but the federal government, Supreme Court, and
regulatory agencies such as the FDA, USDA, and EPA. After decades of
sending petitions and lobbying the White House, Congress and the FDA, to
no avail, it has become clear that the political elite, including
President Obama, care more about their wealthy campaign contributors
than they do about their constituents, including the 93 percent who,
according to a recent New York Times poll, support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods.


As a consequence the anti-GMO movement has moved its focus away from the
unfavorable terrain of Washington D.C., and instead turned its
attention to marketplace pressure, and state, county and local political
campaigns, especially ballot initiatives. Citizen ballot initiatives
are legal in 24 states and approximately 1,000 counties and
municipalities. This form of direct democracy gives voters the power to
enact labeling laws, bans or regulatory and zoning restrictions on
biotech corporations and Big Ag, bypassing indentured politicians and
federal bureaucrats. A number of California and Washington State
counties over the last decade have moved beyond just labeling to
outright bans on GMO crops, thanks to citizen-driven local political
action. In 2014, four Oregon counties will have ballot initiatives
calling for bans on GMO crops.


Win or lose in Washington State on November 5, the anti-GMO Movement has
evolved into a savvy army of grassroots activists who are committed to
the ongoing battle to reclaim our food and farming systems, part of a
larger battle to transform the entire political and economic system.

Iran's latest developments and the players

Iran's latest developments and the players


It's a development like this that I was waiting for, before blogging about the Middle East again. I know that the people who kept visiting my earlier blog posts about this were probably let down, but here is the new one and I thank you for your continuing interest in my posts.

Thethe deal that was signed with Iran in Geneva on Saturday is all over the Sunday talking-head shows today, with "the usual suspects" howling exaggerations (like demanding total dismantling) over it. Still, even the line of the howlers has changed significantly, in this regard: Netanyahu, for example, was howling for total dismantlement and is now howling about just military dismantlement. That'll work. Republicans that now have a stance to Netanyahu's right are the ones whose howls are tone-deaf. Still, Netanyahu's proclamation that this makes Iran more dangerous is what renders Iran's claim that Israel is some kind of rabid dog to the ear of the critic to have credibility, exaggeration though it may be. This isn't helping. Neither Netanyahu nor Iran forwards their respective cases one whit with this level of nonsense.

Worse, though, is the hardline positioned by rabid dog Republicans to Netanyahu's right, as they will affect the U.S. position eventually. If they held any kind of sway, then that would be a disaster, clearly.

UPDATE: I just got a challenge question that requires response. The question: why should an oil-rich nation like Iran be permitted to use nuke power at all? Answer: global warming. Duh. No nation should be forcibly condemned to be confined to only fossil fuels for energy. I'm dead certain that the international petroleum lobbies are salivating at any prospects of forcing a nation to use nothing but fossil fuels for which they'd be richly paid for drilling/mining, but it's the petroleum lobby that poses the next best reason why limited nuke power should be permitted even to Iran--the first and foremost reason being global warming.

UPDATE 2: It's just been brought to my attention that MSNBC's Rachel Maddow did some excellent reporting on the behind-the-scenes negotiations that, per her report, was not just about Iran's nuclear capabilities but also its proxy involvement in Syria. She also did a recap of relations with Iran going back to Reagan's Iran-Contra scandal. Those of you who want further details, I do refer you now to the Rachel Maddow blog. Developments involving Afghanistan have become interesting, too, regarding the end-run made around Karzai via direct dealing with Afghanistan's Loya Jirga. A president that has to answer to the governing body elected by the people is indeed appropriate and I'm sure Karzai doesn't think so, with Karzai having his attitude in common with Egypt's Morsi. All of these things are definitely worth keeping an eye on

In terms of how Islamic governments have functioned historically, even under the Caliphate Empire, tribal law (sharia) was never supposed to dominate other tribes, which each had their own sharia. This imposition of Wahab sharia over non-Wahab tribes is historically unislamic; this is the reason why the House of Saud in Arabia has stood on shaky ground at its inception and is now standing on ever-thinning ground, unable to stand without international support particularly without the support of the U.S. and Britain.

It is a plain and simple fact to all reasonable Muslims that the success of the spread AND the flourishing of the Caliphate Empire was because of the local governments by different tribal sharia, not because of the central government. Also contributing to this was the spoils system set forth by the central government and adopted from Muawiya's practice of spreading Islam across the north African coast. Wahabs who proclaim they're fighting for a new Caliphate empire while imposing Wahab tenets on others simply have no realistic grasp on Islamic history whatsoever

Some months ago, a question about the difficulties of governing by the Incas came up on Yahoo Answers, and the answer I gave for that is a universal truth for all empires: the more repressive the central government gets, the higher the price gets for executing that repression gets. This was true of the Alexandrian Empire all the way through the current governing practices of the Sauds and Syria's Bashar al-Assad, and was even the case of imperial Rome after it had abandoned its republic days as it levied ever-increasing taxes to support that repression.

Repression is not sustainable no matter who commits it. The Caliphate Empire was a success as long as Shiites lived by their own tribal sharia and the Sunnis lived by theirs; this was a co-operation that lasted until the Turks came in, in the 13th century, after the Moguls flattened Baghdad, dominated repressively, and re-ignited that Sunni-Shiite schism which had been resolved with the peace accord at the conclusion of the Day of the Camel. Whether under Omayyad government or Abbasid government, the Caliphate Empire held together and flourished because the primary power was tribally local sharia. The Roman Empire was most successful when it was a genuine republic.

The Sauds rose to power pretending to be Islamic when they weren't, and the same is true for Al Qaida, and the same is true for Morsi. Allah is diminished by these who claim that their rule is his will; what transpires now is insha'allah beyond the control of any mere mortal or any collection of mere mortals who claim Allah's favor.

Any who claim that their side is what Allah wills and that Allah's honor depends on bloodshed committed by mere mortals appear to my eye as blasphemous. If Muslims intend to be the best representatives of Islam to the non-believer, then it would benefit Islam to call Islamists on their blasphemy, for they are the worst people to represent Islam to anybody, believer or non-believer.

It's on the souls of Muslim parents when they send their children schools that teach blasphemy and idolatry under the disguise of Islam. The Holy Koran is holy as a recitation, not as a book, and to revere the book (the Quran in inferior form) is idolatry. Christians who defile books titled "The Holy Quran" are just stupid--but so are the Muslims who kill fellow human beings of Allah's creation over an inferior object of Man's creation.

Should good devout Muslims suffer for the blasphemous idolaters to be the representatives of Islam to the world? Pose this question to your cleric and demand his fatwah on it. Yes, I am aware of previous fatwas on various questions regarding Islamists, but not on this question in particular, nor on the questions of whether these things are ruled to be actual blasphemy and actual idolatry. Seriously--Islamists appear to be in need of a formal declaration that their de facto blasphemy is blasphemy actual, as well as their de facto idolatry.

Is the Quran destroyed because a book or even a bunch of books were destroyed? No.

Is the book desecrated just because the written words, without their prescribed recitation present, are in that book? No because the word "desecrated" presupposes that the book was sacred, and no book is sacred without being idolized; Allah did not make that book.

Is the book which contains the written words of the Quran without their prescribed inflections in place, an inferior form of the Quran? Yes. The Quran is proper and most perfect when recited with inflections in their proper places as the Prophet (PBUH) recited it; what's in the book is more arbitrary.

Is one tribe's sharia inferior to another tribe's sharia just because it's different from Wahab sharia? No, because no cleric in the Caliphate Empire thought so. The precedent set for that answer originates from the Caliphate Empire itself even as it was run by the first four Caliphs.

These questions cry out for widespread universal fatwahs because Islamists ignore all of them, teaching what they claim is Islam which is in conflict with the Prophet's Islam (PBUH).
-----..oo0{O}0oo..-----

There have been other developments this weekend which pertain to the Middle East, like theMiami Book Fair International (I followed that with great interest for the entirety it was broadcast on CSPAN2 on Saturday..."program number
316330-1" on their website; it's been broken down into 10 separate videos HERE and the specific Middle East panel's video is HERE) and there was a broadcast this morning on Radio Australia that I want to cover, so I'll publish this entry now and add those items later in the day. (UPDATE: Sorry, but that broadcast still hasn't turned up as of Dec. 6 and I'm considering that one a total loss. Will edit this post to remove other references to it. Dang and a half)

It may be slow going, though--working from 2 different weather forecasts, one of which forecasts snow and the other, a "wintry mix" which includes sleet, which contains the threat of power/service outages again. And again, will just have to see what actually transpires and work around that.

Previous pertinent post regarding Iran is THIS one; pertinent to Syria and remaining situations in the Middle East and the history thereof areTHIS one, THIS one, THIS one, and THIS one. These would be more pertinent to the discussion of what transpired at the Miami Book Fair, as would be the previous post on the Great War.
...

Syria:BBC Newsnight aired a story of a British jihadist in Syria. Speaking of Newsnight, GAWD I miss Aaron Brown. Go Sun Devils!

Saturday UPDATE, Lebanon: The sectarianism mentioned here and elsewhere on this bloghas surfaced in the Lebanese town of Tripoli, says Al Jazeera English (and pretty much most of Twitter, in that region). As I've mentioned earlier in this post and elsewhere, the differences between Shiite and Sunni were resolved centuries ago until the invasions of the Moguls, Seljuks and Uygurs in the 13th century, a time when sharia law meant something other than what it means today among the Islamists. In Lebanon, here we go again. Yesterday, I heard about unrest in Tunisia, the place that sparked the whole Arab Spring thing, a thing not confined to Arabs. So, my Muslim friends--are we looking not at unity but at Balkanization? I hope not the latter. Consider carefully, and consider the value of reversing that old Reaganism into Verify, Then Trust.


{Mr. HF, I sincerely hope that I have your undivided attention in this post because Middle East history, including Islamic history, is some of the most treacherous, weedy historical terrain to navigate and I remain concerned that you'll get stuck in the weeds there...that, and this is the closest I'll ever get to making book recommendations, still with the caveat that triangulation remains necessary. {Sorry, but as of a check of the ABC website Dec. 6, I conclude that this isn't happening. What I heard was right after the Lynn interview, and what followed the interview was Sufi Meditations Episode 5; yet what I heard was a Q A with mention of the book in question. Search engines aren't producing it either. This is all so much water so far under the bridge at this point that I'm just giving up on it altogether. Some things are just simply lost causes and this is undeniably one of them. National Geographic will at least establish the following: 1) the Caliphate Empire fell by Mongol invasion in the 13th century; 2) the Mongol rule fell by Turk invasion and the subsequent Turk tribes were intermingling to become the Ottomans 3) the Moors were on the run, and not teachin Spaniards anything 4) those Turks had absolutely no interest in Moors.

Equally important is the following: Sunni Muslims will not give a reliable account of Shiites, and the reverse is true; the best 3rd party overview of Islamic history will come from Sufis but they'll skim over a lot of it in their focus on direct divine experience and be, for the most part, apologists. The most inaccurate overview of Islamic history will come from the other two Abrahamic branches of religion--Judaism and Christianity. Those two groups can be counted on to give an entirely bogus account of what sharia law is/how it functions/what made it necessary when it began/how it evolved/how Sunni sharia is different from Shiite sharia.

There is no shortcut to reading *all* of these sources to triangulate your own assessment of what actually happened, and arrive at your own conclusion. Navigation via triangulation is the only way to avoid getting stuck in the weeds.

The person being quizzed in the Q A I heard was the same person who conducts the Sufi Meditations series on Australia Broadcasting: Sheikha Fatima Fleur Nassery Bonnin. Under the circumstances, I would advise that you listen to those for any information tidbits that may accompany any given Meditation in the series, as it's my humble opinion that even though she's an apologist, her accounts of Islamic history, when she gives out those tidbits, is quite detailed as well as quite accurate..but then you'd have to simply trust my fiat on that, and that's problematic, isn't it. But I say this because I've previously arrived at those same details via my own navigation and can independently confirm her accounts that I've heard thusfar, EXCEPT when she states that the main difference between Sunni and Shiite is an issue of succession.

It's exceedingly more complex an issue than that; it's an excuse to avoid the very tall, very dense, very tangled weeds which prove difficult and treacherous for even the well seasoned time traveler. It's with that in mind that I wish I could have been of better help. I suppose I could mention 4 guideposts that will assist in maintaining/regaining your bearings: Mohammed himself, Abu Bekr, Abu Bekr's daughter Ayisha, and Mohammed's daughter, Fatima--with the additional detail that Ayisha became Mohammed's wife and Fatima became Ali's wife. These are just starter guideposts. For the birth and development of sharia, and as pertains to Cordoba Emirate, the guidepost is Muawiya. For Palestine and Persia, it's Calif Omar with the knowledge that Muawiya served under Omar in the beginning AND that Omar is referenced in the Omiyad period of Cordoba's governance under the Empire.

Wending one's way through the shift in law from Omiyads to the Abassides and then to the fall of the Empire prior to Ferdinand and Isabella is a whole 'nother thicket of dense, tangled weeds right there, in addition to which are the changes made by the Turks compared to the fleeing Moors. There's just no way I can do better than that, and that's the end of that. I just hope you found at least a little bit of something useful in all this, if you're even reading any of it at all. Finis. Good luck.}

In the previous posting of navigation tips at the bottom of the second recipe posting, I covered tips confined to perspective navigation, in terms of temporal contemporaries. In this area, temporal triangulation is also required, and I'll cover that in this post. Changing altitude in both contemporary perspective AND temporally is required, so that means keeping close track of your position with each change is very critical.

It's important to keep in mind that I'm not intending to speak as any kind of expert--I speak as someone who has gotten stuck in those same weeds numerous times; I simply speak as someone who has been there, done that, and discovered where the guideposts are located.Every path through those weeds is unique only to the traveler--it's really the best thing to do, for you to chart your own course, as I can no more retrace my own steps to tell you about where I've been, and that's just a simple fact.

I point out again that the reason for any questions I've had were in the interest of comparing notes--your journeys are entirely your own to make and simply aren't expected to even vaguely resemble the ones I've taken. Weeds in particular retain no paths readily. You will find that asking yourself the tough questions will also produce analytical skills that give you your own answers and new triangulation co-ordinates to explore further...and then you'll find that you, yourself, will become independent of any given book while satisfactorily arriving at a conclusion as to what actually happened in history. Try it. :) You too, DM--I would think that you of all people would find it refreshing to have access to material that hasn't been altered by the ADL prism/filter first. You boys have the helm now--go for it.

Seriously--every instance that you access Project Gutenberg, you come aboard my time machine, inside the control room where the core is located...and you'll get no better opportunity at some behind-the-wheel time machine navigation experience than that. If it's any consolation, know ye that I've gotten the tough questions when I went over to Yahoo Answers, and my response to those has usually been "That's an interesting question--I'll go and find out what the answer is". Sometimes I do find the answer; sometimes I don't, but just looking into it contains adventure enough for me, and if I find no answer, I still produce search results. The fun for me is in the expedition itself...you know...just taking the ole TARDIS out for a run. Any excuse to take the old girl out on a run is a good one.

DC, I would recommend for you a refresher on basic training in navigation before fiddling with the control room...thus: Navigation Basics and Time And Relative Dimensions In Space, explained. Of course you can take it...or leave it and stick with being a typical historian. But where's the fun in THAT? There's nothing wrong with being extraordinary, contrary to popular opinion. The worst it ever does is make ordinary people riled. Been there, done that, and you should know firsthand--as an eye witness. :) The term "overachiever" actually doesn't cover it, ha.

Still, I'm well past arguing any of it at this point, and this is just to put stuff out there even if the end result is that you're never going to read it. It's just out there, and I won't argue this point or any other along these lines henceforth; these are just like outgoing messages on an answering machine that isn't taking calls. These asides are just courtesy posts in case it makes some kind of difference to the other party; at this point in time, whether they're read or not, or if you or they dismiss me as completely daft despite the quality of the questions I've asked...oh wait, you didn't leave any room for questions...it all makes zero difference to me.

They're just out there, and that's all. You and I haven't had the long track record of Q A difficulties as these two gents have had and I thought at the very least they deserved some sort of insight as to where the questions come from and why, even though the standard answer to them have been some variation of "I haven't read about that aspect, sorry". It's gotten to the point that I know what they'll say before they say it and I've had enough of that from them and others. It's always the same; it never changes and is predictable. You and I haven't got that sort of track record, so I'm sure these explanations would seem more daft to you than to those two gents.

It's always been the case that I'm better off finding my own answers to my questions, and so it shall be henceforth. I have more productive things to do with my time than attending only to be spinning my wheels for naught. Don't get me wrong--such things as you guys do is great for people who have just scratched the surface of history's basics, but for the entirety of the times I've attended, I've been well beyond the basics, so it's simply just not for me, and despite all the years I've enjoyed the presentations, I could have spared a lot of people a lot of grief by just not going. And thus it has come to pass that I'm just not going. I may very well be all other kinds of daft--I'm just not THAT daft. I can watch on TV, I can get stuff accomplished at home while I'm watching, nobody gets rudely put off or irked, I can research then answer my own questions--frankly, it's what I wind up doing in any case-- so the only point of attending is to waste gasoline. It's pointless otherwise; this way, everybody wins.

DC, I did say that you are appreciated. I'm not taking those words back, and that's why the invitation to you to board the time machine remains extended even if you think the whole thing is bonkers. Give the ole girl a spin first before jumping to conclusions, eh? Or just wander about in Project Gutenberg if you insist; nonetheless, even Project Gutenberg is bigger on the inside than it is on the outside.

Mr. HF, although I don't use the term "temporal triangulation" at the two links I just provided, they do cover the issues of old resources vs new, why each is equally important but by themselves, each aren't reliable. Editors of any era remain gatekeepers of their own age, reflecting the sensibilities of their own age, and so what info is revealed by each is going to be necessarily different, too. By all means, review the material at those links at this time with temporal triangulation, as such, being your focus.}







Certain ones of these are always bigger on the inside and smaller on the outside. Choose wisely, choose many.

FESA Yes, I Made A Dickey

FESA Yes, I Made A Dickey

I do believe this is my last FESA 2013 post before writing a quick round-up. Since I freelance, my list got cut a bit short due to some unexpected jobs popping up. But I did make the dickey!
Not the turtleneck kind with embroidery that grandmas wear, though, this is a chic dickey that gives an instant aura of being one of Charlie's oversize-collared Angels.

Pattern: McCalls 5731 (1977)
Rating: 3/5Fabric, etc.: Paisley quilter's cotton leftover from my travel-pillow projectCost: $3? for the patternTime: A dayNotes: I don't know about anyone else, but I love the look of a collared shirt under a knit top or sweater, but actually layering them looks terrible and bulky. I've owned shirts with sewn in dickeys before, I had just never thought to make my own! I have to say, they're pretty awesome.
I'm pretty pleased with the end result, but the construction was confusing, so I made it and then realized ways I could have improved it:There's no interfacing in the collar! So it is rather soft and floppy, which is okay because it opens up nicely at least.
It turns out there's a lot of exposed seams and I hadn't serged anything so I had to go back and whipstitch the edges.
It's too shifty to wear without tacking it into my shirt, so I'll have to do that asap so I can wear it out and about!I'm also eager to try the other styles offered in the pattern. I want to make t-shirts anyways, but I'm drawn to the cropped pants with the waist-tabs (and no center front zipper!)

Citizen Koch (2013) DOC NYC 2013

Citizen Koch (2013) DOC NYC 2013




Carl Deal and Tia Lessin's Citizen Koch examines the ugly relationship between money and politics. Well, it's ugly for the little guy, but it's a beautiful thing for the 1% who throw tens of millions of dollars into Super PACs and astroturf groups like the Tea Party. I'm talking about people like David Koch, Charles Koch, Sheldon Adelson, and Harold Simmons. By the end of the documentary, my big take away was this: we're f**ked already as a country, but if we don't do anything to change the current plutocracy, we're royally f**ked.

Deal and Lessin's primary focus is the political landscape following the Citizens United ruling in which the Supreme Court basically gave corporations unlimited ability to make political contributions. Politics and money have always been a given, but the current chains of influence and power grabs are terrifying. In the case of Wisconsin governor (and unrepentant union buster) Scott Walker, we watch him kowtow to his money people, most of them from out of state; he does what the money people want, even if it's not best for his constituents. As for the Tea Party, the film shows some candid looks at these low-information voters dressed in britches and tricornes and the flag. It's the money people who ultimately benefit from this buffoonish masquerade. They're playing these silly rubes like Mongo from Blazing Saddles.



This is all obvious stuff for anyone in the Mother Jones, Nation, Democracy Now, NPR, New Yorker, or MSNBC crowd, and Citizen Koch could have simply been a liberal polemic. Yet Deal and Lessin make a smart decision in how to explore these issues of money and political influence. The people they follow are Republicans and conservatives who feel like their party has left them behind. We meet proud conservatives in Wisconsin who are also proud union members, and they don't take kindly to their bargaining rights being taken away. There's also Buddy Roemer, a former Louisiana congressman and governor trying to run in the Republican primary in 2012. He's being kept out because he doesn't have the money and isn't running on a platform that the money people appreciate.

There are times that Citizen Koch can be a real source of despair. The money people have so much power to influence the the way people think about issues. With a TV spot, they can get a bunch of angry mooks to oppose something that's actually in their best interest. What do the informed and with-it people have to combat this level of influence? A vote a piece. And really, it may not be enough. I'm beginning to think that George Carlin was right all along: the only choice we have in this country is paper or plastic, and all the real decisions aren't made by the politicians or the people but the owners of society.



Just how influential are the owners? Well, it's because of David Koch that Citizen Koch will not air on PBS. Koch is a major donor to public television and he had objections to the documentary's content, so PBS killed it even though they had had plans to air it. (Koch's also a major donor to medical reseach and a noted patron of the arts throughout New York City. His name is on a theater in Lincoln Center. The owners lead interesting lives.) Yeah, PBS kowtowed to the owners of society and discarded the filmmakers and the film in the process. Even the people who should be courageous in face of influence are, in the end, willing to compromise their ideals and the ideals of their organization for just a little taste of cash.

Are you depressed yet? That feeling is why we need to do something before our country gets even more f**ked than it is already.

Go see Citizen Koch when it plays in your area and when it opens some time in 2014. Not only is it a well-made documentary and an even-handed one, but it's something that the owners of society don't want you to see. So, let's stick to to those no-good rat bastards any way we can. Stay informed, demand transparency of political contributions, get serious about publicly funded elections. It may be a losing battle, but this is a battle worth fighting.