Polar bears or Gas?

Over the years, the number of polar bears, along with many other animal species, has decreased. While there are efforts to help these animals, there are many more incidents that add to the causes of the reduction of the number of these endangered species.
Today, the polar bears living in Chukchi Sea near Alaska are facing extinction due to people wanting to get oil from the frozen sea. John Kerry and other critics demand a 3-year period to delay to the Chukchi Sea being sold to different oil companies during which the situation of the polar bears could be understood more clearly.

Global Warming evidently is not the only reason for the extinction of these animals. I find it sad that we can’t even leave one sea alone for these animals to live in. Are we so desperate for gas that we need to go around destroying natural habitats of endangered species and kill these animals? I wonder what animals will be left in, say 50 years?

sources:

Littlegreenfootballs.com

http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3359083.ece

Let's be Thankful, shall we?

Another quote caught my attention today.

“In our brief national history we have shot four of our presidents, worried five of them to death, impeached one and hounded another out of office. And when all else fails, we hold an election and assassinate their character.”

— P. J. O’Rourke

To think about it, the history of the U.S. has been really short compared to other countries. Gaining independence from Great Britain of July 4, 1776, this nation is only 232 years old! For a country this young, it is quite amazing how far it has come—becoming one of the most affluent countries in the world, and becoming a world power that many people desire to live in. During this extremely short history of this nation, there have been many good things that have happened but also many bad things that the people have done to the presidents who have helped lead this nation to what exists today.

Yesterday, I noted the importance of the media and press, thanks to JFK; today, I just want to say, let’s appreciate the people that are willing to lead this nation. As presidential campaigns are going on, there is a lot of bashing of candidates happening. Presidents and candidates are people too. Let’s not be too hard on them.

Press is Good

There was a quote on Dailykos.com by JFK:

“There is a terrific disadvantage in not having the abrasive quality of the press applied to you daily. Even though we never like it, and even though we wish they didn't write it, and even though we disapprove, there isn't any doubt that we could not do the job at all in a free society without a very, very active press”

As I read this, I thought, many times people complain about the media and newspapers. But without the press, what would happen? We take so much time complaining about the media and how it portrays certain people. And this is true—the media, many times, does affect the public in a negative way. But without the media, what would happen to the public opinion? Would there be any public opinion at all? Without the press would our worldview would be very limited. Even with the press some people have a hard time trying to understand problems of other places and other people. Many times, we get caught up with the negative aspect of things that we forget to remember the positives and be thankful. Although the press may have some detrimental effects on society, it does help formulate a public opinion and broaden our perspectives on life, right? Let’s be thankful.

Pressure till Explosion

The Shiites celebrate a festival called Ashura in which they torture themselves (“beat and cut themselves with chains and knives in public rituals that leave the streets running with blood”)—it is coming up soon. The day before the festival started, there was a suicide bomber that fired a gun several times and then blew himself up and killing along with himself nine other people and wounding approximately 20 other people.

The film, Paradise Now, provided me a deeper understanding of why a person might possibly be willing to become a suicide bomber and causing things like this to happen. This movie gave me the impression that suicide bombers don’t really want to blow themselves up because of their own beliefs but more because of the pressure they feel from their authority. The movie portrays two ordinary people that are close friends. Life is pretty boring and could be better, but it’s not terrible—they have the basic food and shelter to live. They did feel trapped and hopeless, to a degree, about their current situation with Israel. They did agree that in order to do something about it, being suicide bombers was the best way to attack the Israelis. However, they didn’t seem to believe in this so much as to be enthusiastic about going to blow themselves up. They felt that they had to do it because it was their duty and the social pressure was quite overwhelming.

The portrayal of the Khaled and Said in the film totally shattered the image of the radical Muslim extremists that I often pictured in my head when reading articles such as this one on Littlegreenfootballs. On the other hand, the movie is a movie and it was a story about only two people out of the multitude of other previous suicide bombers. I can’t quite make up my mind on this matter, however, Paradise Now did indeed make me think and understand a little more why someone would be willing to bomb oneself up.

Change of Mind

As I was looking for something to write on, I came across an interesting blog post on hutchinsonleader.com. Norma McCorvey also known as “Roe” in Roe VS Wade who fought for the right of women to have abortions, changed her opinion. McCorvey actually never had an abortion because the court took a long time to make a ruling on this case, so she gave birth to the child and then gave the child up for adoption. She went as far as to ask the Supreme Court to change their ruling on the Roe VS Wade court case and joined “Operation Rescue” an anti-abortion organization. This information really intrigued me.

Someone who fought so hard for a purpose changing their mind on the issue? How could this be? These are rare cases, but through these stories, I was reminded that in the end, what is right will prevail, no matter how weak and small it seems to be in comparison to the many deceitful yet attractive things that we choose to believe in instead.

The Gray Line between Politics and Religion

Mike Huckabee claimed, “"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution, but I believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards”.

This is a strong statement to make. To some degree, I do admire Huckabee for having the guts to say this in public, especially during his campaign period. However, I wonder if this is a wise thing to do.

The United States is proud to present itself as a country with freedom of speech and religion and although it was founded on Christianity, today things are a little different. We say that we are religiously tolerant; however, when people pray in public or loudly proclaim their beliefs—some people would give respect to these people and admire them, but I don’t think that would be the majority of us.

In this kind of society, would it be wise to give such speeches and make strong statements about one’s religion during a political campaign? It is definitely courageous of Huckabee to say these words, but frankly, I do not think this is the best way to get votes from a large portion of the population.

It’s great that Huckabee is a Christian and he seems to take his faith seriously, however, it seems to me that he’s too vigorously imposing his religious beliefs on other people. Isn’t it a little strong of a statement to say things about amending the country’s Constitution (that was written decades ago, by the founders of this nation) to go along with his own religious beliefs?

Unquenchable Thirst

When Apple first released iPods, it was every teenager’s dream to get one. There are many variations of the iPod: the original, iPod mini, iPod nano, and even iPod video. They recently also came out with the iPhone complete with touch screen and internet access. The latest craze is a new laptop: MacBook Air. It is the “World’s Thinnest Notebook Computer.” It has a 13-inch screen, and it is 0.16 inches at its thinnest point and only 0.76 inches at its thickest point, weighing only 3 pounds!

When reading this (on Littlegreenfootballs), two things struck me.
First, this reminded me that technology has been improving at a shockingly (and impressively) rapid speed over the past years. This has been a beneficial thing to some extent, especially with many significant improvements in the medical realm. And other technologies have also made life more convenient for the majority of us. However, it’s quite scary, how fast this world is changing. And obviously with the new developments, there are negative aspects of this situation as well. These machines that we’ve invented may provide convenience but some have had harmful affects on mankind as well. The invention of the automobile, for example, has brought us convenience and conservation of time, however, our environment suffers from this and it has become a critical issue.

The other thing that I realized was how materialistic our culture is. Yes, we all want to follow the trend. Taking Apple as an example—if everyone else has an iPod, naturally, we all want an iPod as well. But, however, if one gets an iPod, new things will continue to be released by companies (ex: iPhone). Although, at first, our desire for an iPod will be satisfied by buying an iPod, but as other things come out, we will want those as well. Our thirst for more (to buy more) will never be fully quenched—we will never be fully satisfied through the things we buy on this earth. And, sadly, this is an inescapable situation because our economy works this way!

No Limit

There have been many terrorist attacks on the Western world in the past decade. The 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001 and the bombings in the transportation system in England in 2005 are two big examples of this. On Littlegreenfootsballs.com today, there was an interesting post about how there are an increasing number of Muslim converts in the Western world and how this has become a bigger issue over the years.

The exact number is unknown, but there has been an estimate of 1500 British people having been converted to Islam and Carlile, “the Government's independent reviewer of anti-terrorism legislation, said many of the converts had been targeted by radical Muslims while serving prison terms.” This is also becoming an increasingly bigger problem, not only in England, but also in the United States.

When the search for suspects for bombings could be narrowed to Middle-Eastern people, the job was much easier for investigators. However, now, as there have been more and more Caucasian converts to Islam, the suspects for terrorist bombings has escaped the limit of the physical standard for being a terrorist. Carlile says, “These (converts] are outside the “standard” type of profile which most police forces would have of a terrorist, which is male, young, and of Middle Eastern or Asian appearance. That is why they are so potentially dangerous.”

There are many examples of this in other countries but taking the U.S. as an example—a nation whose Declaration of Independence claims “all men are created equal” there have been times when we didn’t treat each other as equals. Thinking back to the after-effects of Pearl Harbor during WWII—one of the biggest reactions of the American people were that they were very cautious around Japanese people, even Japanese-Americans, even going to the extreme at one point and sending them off to concentration camps. I don’t blame them for their reaction. It is only natural for us to be afraid when incidents like Pearl Harbor happen. There is fear and sadness and also anger are all inevitable reactions when people encounter such terrible disasters. But it’s one thing to be afraid and wary; it’s another to take out the anger on innocent people whose only crime was to be of the same race as those who committed these terrorist acts.

There had been a similar reaction after 9/11. Middle-Eastern people or people of Middle-Eastern descent, other darker-skinned people, and people with Middle-Eastern last names, whether they were Muslim or not, were prejudiced against. According to some interviews, some Muslims “experienced emotional shunning” for a period of time after the terrorist attack. Some stayed home for a couple days after 9/11. Others had to go through extra security checks at airports.

During those times, there were certain minority groups that could be singled out and interrogated. Now, since this terrorist problem has not been contained within certain racial groups, will everyone be interrogated? Is everyone a possible suspect? White/Arab/Middle Eastern/Asian/Black/Latino/etc. all the same?

Other sources:

http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/AlQaeda39s-white-army-of-terror.3667425.jp

http://community.nursingspectrum.com/MagazineArticles/article.cfm?AID=8207

http://www.alternet.org/story/12065/

Prince marries Princess' brother?!

Last week, there was a post on Andrew Harmon’s blog about colleges offering classes such as homosexuality 101. There was a comment on this blog by Carson Lee saying, “I can’t really see how this is going to lead us in 10, 20 years, but I pray that I won’t have to take my kids to see a Disney movie only to see the hero kiss another hero in the end.” I’m afraid this might just be the kind of future we might live in if the society continues to progress in this manner.

On Dailykos.com, there was an issue about a children’s book called ‘King and King’ being available for any child to borrow at several public libraries. This book is about a prince that refuses to marry a princess, but instead insists on marrying the princess’ brother. After a couple (Issas) attempted to get the book banned from all libraries, liberal activists went out of their way to make sure that this book would be accessible to children at several public libraries.

Jeff Issa said, “I just want kids to enjoy their innocence and their time of growing up. Let them be kids…and not worry about homosexuality, race, religion. Just let them live freely as kids.” On the other hand, Kathee Rhode says that censoring books is not the library’s duty, but that of the children’s parents. Rhode says, “the library strives to provide material representing a spectrum of views and ways of life.” She says that parents should decide for their own children, a couple cannot decide for all the children in this nation.

While Rhode has a point, personally, I’m afraid of this kind of future. It’s one thing to have homosexuality 101 offered at a college, it’s a totally different matter when children have the choice of reading a story book about homosexual people with the only thing preventing them from doing so is their parent or guardian.

Temperature Madness

The effects of global warming are evident throughout the world. Even here, in Grand Rapids, Michigan, we have had a considerably warm winter with temperatures going over 50 degrees Fahrenheit in January. In the film, Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore discusses the issue of Global Warming. He had talked about how the effects of global warming leading to droughts in some areas and some areas have had severe floods, However, no one had expected to see it snow in Baghdad. “‘For the first time in my life I saw a snow-rain like this falling in Baghdad," said Mohammed Abdul-Hussein, a 63-year-old retiree from the New Baghdad area.”

While there were multiple trite blogs from people who were simply amazed at the snow in Baghdad, it was definitely refreshing to get something a little more amusing from Patrick J. Lyons. He says, “people will no doubt be busy stuffing this little datapoint into a thousand endless arguments about everything from global climate change (we can hear the “warming, shmorming” comments coming now) to omens of divine favor and apocalyptic prophecy.”

The Holocaust is no excuse

Today, on Littlegreenfootballs, there was an article about how Mahatma Gandhi’s grandson, Arun Gandhi, commented that the Jews are hiding behind the Holocaust. He said that Israel was over-reacting to the Holocaust and that they should move on from it saying, “It is a very good example of [how] a community can overplay a historic experience to the point that it begins to repulse friends.”

Arun Gandhi says that Israel uses the Holocaust to make the rest of the world feel guilty about what happened to the Jewish people and through this be an exception. They shield themselves with their weapons and are not willing to live in harmony with neighboring countries. With this kind of attitude Gandhi says, “The Jewish identity in the future appears bleak. Any nation that remains anchored to the past is unable to move ahead…”

He proposes that the Jews should instead, “befriend those who hate you. Can you not reach out and share your technological advancement with your neighbors and build a relationship?”

It is never good for an individual or a nation to hold onto past grudges for long periods of time, even if we’re talking about the Holocaust: the infamous massacre of approximately 6 million Jews that happened just within the past century. I agree with Arun Gandhi that Israel will need to change and move on for a better future; however, the Holocaust still remains an event that has significantly impacted history—this will never change.

Many Koreans and Chinese people still hold grudges against the Japanese because of what happened during the Rape of Nanking and Japanese Colonization. Perhaps, Gandhi’s words are applicable to these countries as well. Maybe these countries have held grudges against each other for too long and it is time to move on and focus on the future rather than hanging onto history.

Hypocritical America

In continuation to my entry on the 5^th , Mukhlas and the two other people convicted of the bombing in Bali are currently in a prison cell, awaiting the day of their execution. Today, Mukhlas and his accomplices demanded a different execution method: decapitation rather than being shot—which they say is against the Islamic law (littlegreenfootballs.com).

What really caught my attention was not the article itself, but the comments left by other readers. There were comments such as: “Wrap them in pigskin, dip the bullets in pig fat, and shoot them anyway”, “Can they be suffocated in pigskin?” or “force-fed lard until their arteries burst?” Of all the comments (there were 190 when I last checked), similar comments dominated.

Talk about cruel and insensitive! Not only do we want to inflict physical pain on them, we try to offend their religion too!

While I agree that the Bali bombers have crossed the line, this is not quite the reaction I had expected from a nation who’s Supreme Court, just yesterday, pondered whether execution by lethal injection is too “cruel and unusual”. I feel that this is very hypocritical. While we sympathize with our own prisoners, simultaneously, we try to come up with harsh and offensive punishments for foreign prisoners the same time.

Punishment for Crimes...too harsh?

It is intriguing to see what two different countries (U.S., Iran) with different forms of government (Democracy, Theocratic Republic) and culture have to say about punishment for crimes. In today’s entry on Dailykos, the writers mentioned how the Supreme Court was struggling to decide whether the lethal injections are inflicting too much pain on the prisoner being executed. Simultaneously, in Iran, five men’s right hand and left feet were amputated for various crimes including “armed robbery, hostage taking, and firing at police. Armed robbery, taking hostages, and firing at the police" are serious crimes, but amputation? That is definitely a little too harsh. It’s no surprise that individuals and organizations such as Amnesty International are condemning these actions, calling it “cruel, inhuman, and degrading.” (Littlegreenfootballs/Iran: Criminals Lose Hands And Feet As Shari'a Law Imposed)

Although the death penalty does exist in the United States, the Supreme Court is concerned whether lethal injections are inflicting too much pain on the prisoner executed and if it’s going against the Constitution’s 8^th Amendment – which states: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted”. Although I agree that some kinds of punishment is off-limits: such as cutting of limbs, torture, or the electric chair, I believe that we should not over-sympathize about the ‘level of pain’ in punishments such as lethal injection. I believe that the sentencing to death should be carefully determined, and only used against criminals that have committed the most notorious crimes, but once the sentencing is decided upon, we should stop pitying and sympathizing.

Faith like None Other

The two blogs that I finally decided on following are littlegreenfootballs.com and dailykos.com.
They are both updated multiples times a day, by different people.

As politicians fight to be a candidate for the presidential elections of November 2008, there are myriad things said about them by people all over the nation, not to mention all over the world. People wonder; is age and experience really that important? Do we want a brand new face representing this country?
Reading about a speech night at the 100 club on dailykos.com, there were many things said about Hillary and Obama. “Whether Clinton's supporters were instructed to hold their sign-waving for her appearance, or they just weren't that worked up, it meant that through an hour and a half of speeches, Obama's supporters were the only visible ones.”

The blog post that struck me on littlegreenfootballs.com, although not too political, was Bali Bomber’s Memoir: ‘The Right and Good Dreams’.
After killing over 200 people and injuring approximately the same amount, Mukhlas, one of the three bombers feels “beautiful”. He doesn’t regret his actions—quite pleased actually. He firmly believes that what he did was right and he encourages other Muslims to read his book that he wrote while in jail, waiting for the day of his execution.
Since the tragedy of 9/11, I’ve wondered. While these Muslims are so radical and so out-there, where are the Christians? What are we doing? These Muslims believe in something that is not even true. But they believe with faith like none other. If, we Christians, claim to believe in real truth, what are we doing? What is the right thing to do?