Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
To see more details, click here.


NCMEC to get award? Are you kidding me?

Now this really pisses me off!

Press Release from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children

Today, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children announced it has been named a first runner-up in the Non-Profit category of the 2005 Cisco Growing with Technology Awards, an event designed to recognize

small- to medium-sized organizations

that demonstrate how networking technology solutions can effectively address business challenges. To learn more please click on the link below or visit Thank you.

Are you joking? Small to Medium size organizations? The NCMEC recieves 25-30 million per year from the US Dept. of Justice plus millions more from corporations. They are one of the largest charities in the US. Cisco even considering them for a reward that is supposed to be for small to medium sized organizations is a slap in the face to organizations that have to struggle for their funding and still do a better job of finding missing children than the NCMEC. It makes a travesty of the award itself. But since the NCMEC regularly intercepts ideas and funding that would otherwise be destined for smaller charities, it doesn't surpise me.

More things that just piss me off


Taylor Biel and

Parents Read This Story!

Photographer Ben Fawley A Suspect Again in Taylor Behl case

I do not think many people gave it much credence when police and authorities originally claimed that Ben Fawley was not a “person of interest” in the Taylor Marie Behl disappearance. Police state that clues that lead to the discovery of Taylor Behl’s body came from pictures that were on Ben Fawley’s web site.

Police found the body of Virginia Commonwealth University freshman Taylor Marie Behl, 17, after examining photographs on the Web site of an amateur photographer who was one of the last people to see Behl alive.

“I don’t think that I would be too far off base to say that he is a suspect in this case,” Richmond police chief Rodney Monroe said Friday on CBS News’ The Early Show. However, Ben Fawley has still not been charged in the Behl case but is being held on other non-related charges.

Photo led police to student’s body

Police found the critical photo that led them to Behl’s remains on one of Fawley’s Web sites, where he had posted a gallery of his digital snapshots.

Internet Central In Behl Case

The Early Show correspondent Tracy Smith reports that the two met through Web sites where people post photos and messages. Taylor shared intimate details of her life on these sites, Smith reports. “There seems to be a lot of information on here that someone who didn’t know her would have a pretty good idea who she is and what she’s all about,” one computer expert told Smith.

While the Internet can put young people like Behl at risk, Smith reports, experts also say it can provide clues when they go missing. “It really can offer nearly a complete profile of the individual,” one expert told Smith. “Who they spoke to, when and where they expect to go, where they’ve been in their past.” On Taylor’s Web site, there are numerous messages from Fawley, who took and posted pictures of Taylor on the Internet.

That website they mentioned is! Teenagers there are posting that there age is 20-24 years old, they are posting pictures there, information about themselves, where they go to school, where they live, etc. etc. If a pedophile wants to abduct one of them, he can get all the info he needs, then go to where the child lives or hangs out according to the information they post there, and even start talking to them by name to put them off guard long enough to lure them somewhere or get close enough to snatch them.

It is a virtual shopping mall for sexual predators. If your children or teenagers post at I suggest you immediately take measures to prevent them from doing so. Go to and search for your teenager to see if they have a profile on there now, then take precautions. Some people will say I am being an alarmist, however, I ask them, how many Taylor Biels have to happen before you agree with me? It's just like red lights at dangerous intersections, you can never get the authorities to put lights there until people are killed.

Chris McElroy
Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off

Senators Naming Structures After Themselves???

This is a reprint by an author on Actual Article here.
By: dscjmc · Section: Diaries

Tomorrow, the House plans to consider the Agriculture Appropriations Conference Report. Contained in this legislation is a provision renaming a Federal facility in Mississippi after the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Thad Cochran. The provision renames the "Southern Horticultural Laboratory" as the "Thad Cochran Southern Horticultural Laboratory."

This amount of hubris is just sickening. Really, really sickening. AND, he is not the only culprit. Half of Alaska is named after Senator Ted Stevens, including the "Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport," which, by the way, is located on the island that required significant appropriations for the now infamous "Bridge to Nowhere."

Then, of course, there is Don Young Way, named after House Transportation Chairman Young of Alaska, which was approved by the House earlier this year in the Transportation appropriations bill.

Yet, it gets worse. The recent Labor and Health and Human Services Appropriations bill passed by the Senate, renamed the Center for Disease Control and Prevention as the Thomas Harkin Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and designated the National Library of Medicine building in Bethesda, Maryland, as the "Arlen Specter National Library of Medicine."

Not only is all of this just beyond the scope of rational thinking, it is actually prohibited by House rules. Rule XXI of the House Rules for the 109th Congress states:

"6. It shall not be in order to consider a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report that provides for the designation or redesignation of a public work in honor of an individual then serving as a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator." Click here for the Source

What a disgrace. If you can't wait until you die to have a building named after you, at least wait until you are no longer serving in Congress.

I couldn't agree more. The egos involved in this fiasco make me sick as well. Not enough for them to line their pockets at tax payer expense, they want to be honored by us for doing so and if we are unwilling to honor them, then by god they will do it themselves.

More things that just piss me off

Verisign Bullies ICANN

Kurt Pritz is a qualified and practicing attorney with an impressive 20-year Corporate career in Executive Operational roles.

As Vice President, Production at Walt Disney Imagineering, Mr. Pritz directed the engineering and manufacture of theme park shows worldwide. Prior to that, he worked as Plant Manager supervising over 200 employees for Eaton Corporation, the manufacture of electronic assemblies and avionics sub-systems. He holds a B.S. and M.S. in Physics, an M.B.A. and a J.D.

Currently, he is on the ICANN staff. ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the governing body of the Internet under the US Dept. of Commerce. They oversee Registries and Registrars of Domain Names as one of their functions.

The following email reprinted here from a public list is on the subject of the contract with Verisign to handle the .com domain name registry. Basically no matter where you register a .com domain name, the name comes from Verisign. My comments below are those in italics.

ICANN Registrar Constituency:

Thank you for this opportunity to make the Registrar community aware of the proposed settlement with VeriSign. ICANN is seeking to end all pending litigation over this long-standing dispute. The settlement agreement documents have been posted for public comment on ICANN's website ( and are subject to final approval of the ICANN Board. In addition to comments received, there are some specific issues we would like to discuss with you, now that we are in a position to do so. An important purpose of this posting is to solicit the views of the Registrars' constituency on all of the settlement documents.

The public comment period whenever ICANN does anything is a joke. They never respond to comments and as is obvious by their past decisions either ignore the comments they read or do not even bother to read them.

The parties entered into non-public negotiations in an effort to establish whether it was possible to reach an agreement. The negotiations led to a lengthy set of discussions regarding specific provisions of the agreement and the conflict points and also sought consultation with the US Department of Commerce, as required by the present .COM agreement.

Non-Public negotiations = Non-transparency, another feature brought to us by ICANN.

We understood in entering into these discussions that it would be nearly impossible for a public company such as VeriSign to participate in an open and public dialogue for the resolution of such a dispute, without a concrete proposal regarding how the settlement could be constructed. Therefore, ICANN negotiated the best possible deal that it believed that it could negotiate in the public's interest, and required a full 24-day public comment period before board approval would be sought.

Of course Verisign wanted the talks to be private. They were after a sweet deal. Again the comment period meant nothing whatsoever. The agreement that resulted did not take those comments into account. If they had the agreement would have been much different.

All ICANN constituencies and advisory committees are being asked directly for input. Following this public comment period, ICANN's Board will evaluate the public comments received and decide on next actions relating to this entire settlement proposal.

unh hunh.

This letter is intended to provide information regarding the proposed agreement and use of the comment period by providing: some background on the conflict and detail regarding the proposed settlement, benefits accruing from the agreements to the registrars, identification of issues that remain to be discussed during this comment period, a plan for how to carry the discussion forward.

Background; the settlement and agreement From ICANN's inception it has existed in conflict with the principal commercial entity in the DNS space, the .COM registry operator, and that conflict has continued in various forms up until this time. NSI was acquired by VeriSign in 2000, and since that time ICANN and VeriSign have been involved in a series of additional conflicts.

Like the fact that Verisign/Network Solutions started as a monopoly and still are since .com domain names are the ones people really want.

This tension and conflict has heavily influenced the contractual relationships between NSI/VeriSign and ICANN from the beginning. The first agreement with the operator of the .COM Registry was in 1999, and was brokered by the United States Department of Commerce
with a reluctant NSI. This agreement framework created the separation of registries and registrars and introduced the opportunity for new players in the registrar market.

Breaking up the monopoly, only in that there would be resellers and that they might not control .net and .org.

That agreement was replaced with a new agreement in 2001, which split the 1999 agreement (which covered .COM, .NET and .ORG) into three separate agreements, one for each registry. Unlike the others, .COM Registry Agreement included a presumptive right of renewal to VeriSign. The .ORG Registry was re-bid with a presumption that it would go to a third party and was subsequently awarded to PIR. The .NET Registry was re-bid during the last year, without a presumption of renewal or a presumption of a change of operator and was re-awarded to VeriSign. The growing diversity of business models among registrars was reflected in the variety of responses to this new contract.

Re-awarding it to Verisign is basically approving the monopoly. There were qualified companies the contract could have gone to, increasing competition, but instead of representing the best interest of Internet Users, they chose to represent the best interest of Verisign.

The original 2001 .COM Registry Agreement containing the presumptive right of renewal to VeriSign did not fully resolve the various fundamental differences of view between ICANN and VeriSign, and those differences have continued to generate disputes up to and including the issues involved in the current litigation.

The proposed settlement will end ICANN's dispute with VeriSign. The litigation focused on the introduction by VeriSign of new "Registry
Services" and whether the current .COM agreement (signed in 2001) provided for oversight by ICANN over the introduction of services (such as "SiteFinder"). It was quickly understood that the settlement discussions were inextricably bound up in the contract language and that any settlement required a re-writing of the registry agreement. It was necessary for the parties to renegotiate terms within a new .COM Registry Agreement relating to a new clear definition of registry services and the approach for approval of such services.

Therefore, in concert with the settlement, ICANN and VeriSign have entered into a new proposed registry agreement. The settlement has been in negotiation for many months, with talks extending back to late 2004. The new agreement has been streamlined from the old (161 pages versus 91). It provides that VeriSign will operate the registry into 2012.

Basically eliminating 71 pages of requirements Verisign will no longer have to adhere to. Such as the money they were supposed to reinvest into Internet improvements like infrastructure.

Benefits accruing from the agreement

We see several benefits accruing from the proposed settlement. The settlement ends a costly, time-consuming litigation. The end of the
litigation and the provision for binding arbitration in the future will also end the diversion of resources applied to this litigation over the past two years. Many things of importance to the ICANN mission and to registrars have been left undone and can now be accomplished.

In other words, Verisign won the battle of my lawyer can beat up your lawyer and ICANN caved in, impervious to the best interests of fair competition and individual users.

Additionally the agreement, we think, will facilitate the introduction of new registry services by VeriSign that are intended to increase the number of registrations. The confrontational nature of the VeriSign/ICANN relationship prior to the settlement certainly slowed the introduction of new services. Having greater certainty and speed will facilitate the introduction of new business opportunities for registries and registrars.

Yeah, right. Basically allowing them to do what they want would create new opportunities to make more money. I'm not against them making money, but ICANN was created with one of their functions being to oversee the activities of Verisign and other companies involved with registration of domain names. Now that oversight is becoming a joke.

The new registry services process should also work to provide certainty, additional markets and protect registrars against unanticipated product introductions that may have an adverse affect. VeriSign has agreed to a definition of registry services that ensure that new
product introduction will be vetted for adverse stability, security and competition effects prior to deployment.

Vetted by whom? Verisign?

Also, the agreement puts into place a standing technical panel in order to ensure timely, unbiased opinions regarding the potential effects of product introductions on security and stability of the DNS. Competition issues will be referred to appropriate governmental competition authority/authorities; the proposed agreement clarifies ICANN's role and recognizes that determination of whether a registry's action is competitive or anti-competitive is an appropriate function of existing national bodies.

In other words, Verisign said what they plan to do and that ICANN can't do anything about it. They no longer recognize ICANN as the authority on these issues.

The agreement also provides certainty as to the price of a domain name going forward. Under the terms of this agreement, VeriSign can raise the price of a name up to 7% each year. It is understood that any increase in price over $6 will affect some business models. The price has been constant for six years. While price increases are rarely welcome, this agreement provides a ceiling and notice of prices for the next seven years. During the negotiations, a significantly wider range of price increases was suggested and discussed. This negotiation was not a competitive re-bid process where there existed leverage for reducing the per name price.

Even greedy IdeaLabs that operate the .TV domain name registrations only raises their price by 5% per year. Obviously again, Verisign said what they will do and that ICANN has no control over it.

The price changes described in the agreement provide notice and an opportunity to react to increases: there must be at least six months notice before any price increase; there will continue to offered registrations for up to a ten year term, to allow those who want to guarantee their registration costs for ten years to do so; and there are restrictions on VeriSign creating tying arrangements.

Because of the presumptive right of renewal to VeriSign for the .COM Registry, ICANN's negotiating power relative to pricing and other key terms is significantly different than in the setting of terms for the re-bid relating to the .NET Registry. Accordingly, as ICANN
accredited registrars and customers of VeriSign we are requesting your review and comments relating to this settlement and the accompanying .COM Registry Agreement.

Issues for discussion

The comment period is intended to provide opportunity for discussion of areas of interest to parties not named in the agreement so that these issues can be taken into account. Some of these issues have been identified by registrars in discussions after the agreement was

Increases in the price VeriSign charges registrars for domain names. Not listened to.
The combination of registrar and registry fees that will be invoiced and discussion of a reduced fee level for registrars that can be approved in a timely manner.
The manner in which fees are potentially passed from registry to registrar and then on to registrants. Approved since the end user is the one that gets screwed anyway.
This may include a requirement for line-itemization of all fees on the registrant invoice. which matters how?
Description of long-term ICANN revenue goals that are a prerequisite to achieving the goals set out in the USG MoU and gaining independent status. thats the money ICANN gets off each domain name registration, which I assume will also rise by 7% each year.
The process by which registrars approve the variable registrar fees described in the adopted budget now and in years going forward.

The discussion forward

The proposed agreement is being posted for public comment for 24 days. for all the good that will do.
This time period should be used to discuss and determine with clarity various positions on the issues above. positions that don't matter since the agreement with Verisign is basically done except for the rubber stamp approval by the Board.
This can be done with a series of generally attended conference calls, individual consultations and meetings with registrar representatives.
Many registrars participated through the registrar representatives in negotiation of the .NET agreement. As proof of the fact the public comment periods are worthless since .net was re-awarded to Verisign anyway.

ICANN will arrange with registrars involved in the discussion or there representative a series of consultation through the comment period to ensure full discussion and consideration of the issues raised. sure thing.

We look forward to receiving the Registrar community's input. If you have a comment and participate, that contribution will be taken into account. blah blah blah.

Thank you for the time taken to read and consider this material.


Kurt Pritz

For those of you who don't know it, there are groups of individual users and small business owners who are trying to assure fair competition on the Internet and are trying to avoid having the entire Internet hijacked by a handful of corporations. If you would like to join in that effort, read the information below;

Announcement list

Official announcements, only DNSO Secretariat may write to this list.
To subscribe (or unsubscribe) to the Announcement list, please send an email to with the words subscribe announce (or unsubscribe announce) in the body of the message.

General Assembly list

Anybody interested in the DNSO issues may subscribe to this list, only subscribers may write to this list.
Two main principles since the origin of this server in June 1999, explained in the welcome message sent by majordomo to every new subscriber:
The non cross-posting rule is reinforced. (Not posting to more than one list the same post)
The respect of participants is mandatory. (Personal Attacks are not welcome)
More explicit rules of order defined HERE.
More about GA list monitoring in HERE.
Currently, there is a limit of FIVE postings per day on the GA mailing list.
To subscribe (or unsubscribe) to the General Assembly list, please send an email to with the words subscribe ga (or unsubscribe ga) in the body of the message.

Hope to see some of you get involved!

More things that just piss me off

Oil for Food Kickbacks

NY Times Article

For those that don't want to sign up with the times so that you can read this, I've cut a couple of paragraphs out to illustrate my point.

United nations Oil for Food ScandalUNITED NATIONS, Oct. 26 - More than 4,500 companies took part in the United Nations oil-for-food program and more than half of them paid illegal surcharges and kickbacks to Saddam Hussein, according to the independent committee investigating the program.

Paul VolckerThe country with the most companies involved in the program was Russia, followed by France, the committee says in a report to be released Thursday. The inquiry was led by Paul A. Volcker, former chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.

It's no wonder those two countries did not want us to invade Iraq.

"Even though we are looking at it from the outside, it kind of screams out at you, 'Why didn't somebody blow a whistle?' The central point is that it all adds up to the same story. You need some pretty thoroughgoing reforms at the U.N."

Well, Duh. Yes they need to reform the UN. It has become more corrupt than many of it's nation members. However, with that said, most of the people I've seen posting on this blamed only the UN, when it is now obvious that several multinational corporations manipulated the system and worked within the boundaries of the corruption inside the UN and in Iraq, making them just as responsible.

Those manipulating the program ranged from established trading companies to front companies set up for the purpose, and included some companies of international reputation as well as many well known in their home countries, the investigators said.

Saddam hussein oil for food programMr. Hussein received $1.8 billion in illicit income from surcharges and kickbacks on the sales of oil and humanitarian goods during 1996-2003, when the program ran, the committee concluded in its last report in September.

At first, he said, companies balked at paying the extra fees, and the oil sales slowed. At that point, "less orthodox companies" came forward and accepted the terms, opening the way for the program's full scale exploitation and allowing legitimate companies to buy oil from illegitimate ones.

I suspect that not just "less orthodox companies" came forward, but that fronts were created to shield some of the larger multinational corporations, so they could later claim they knew nothing about it.

"The responses range from absolute denial to complete admittance," he said. "Some said, 'We had no knowledge of it' - that's a pretty standard response - and some said, 'If we paid it, we don't know we paid it.' "

Yeah, sure. We believe you. Yes innocent until proven guilty, blah blah blah, but the fact is with all we have seen of corporate corruption in the past few years, I'll have to assume the worst in this case. These corporations care only about the bottom line and the CEO's care about keeping their jobs. A little dealing with the enemy isn't going to stop them from making a profit.

The committee said some companies had complained that the evidence against them was gathered in Iraq and was therefore not trustworthy. But a lead investigator said that in those cases where corroborating evidence was available, the Iraqi information turned out to be sound.

"Everybody down the line kept very meticulous records because Saddam told them, 'You get the surcharge from everybody,' " he said. "So they all wanted to document how they got the surcharge."

The question is, when this is turned over to American Prosecutors, will they really go after the companies and individuals who dealt with Saddam Hussein no matter where it leads or will it all get brushed over because of the power of the energy lobby?

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Torturing Prisoners

From the NYTimesThis week, Vice President Dick Cheney proposed a novel solution for the moral and legal problems raised by the use of American soldiers to abuse prisoners and the practice of turning captives over to governments willing to act as proxies in doing the torturing. Mr. Cheney wants to make it legal for the Central Intelligence Agency to do this wet work.

Mr. Cheney's proposal was made in secret to Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican who won the votes of 89 other senators this month to require the civilized treatment of prisoners at camps run by America's military and intelligence agencies. Mr. McCain's legislation, an amendment to the Defense Department budget bill, would ban the "cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment of prisoners. In other words, it would impose age-old standards of democracy and decency on the new prisons.

President Bush's threat to veto the entire military budget over this issue was bizarre enough by itself, considering that the amendment has the support of more than two dozen former military leaders, including Colin Powell. They know that torture doesn't produce reliable intelligence and endangers Americans' lives.

But Mr. Cheney's proposal was even more ludicrous. It would give the president the power to allow government agencies outside the Defense Department (the administration has in mind the C.I.A.) to mistreat and torture prisoners as long as that behavior was part of "counterterrorism operations conducted abroad" and they were not American citizens. That would neatly legalize the illegal prisons the C.I.A. is said to be operating around the world and obviate the need for the torture outsourcing known as extraordinary rendition. It also raises disturbing questions about Iraq, which the Bush administration has falsely labeled a counterterrorism operation.

Mr. McCain was right to reject this absurd proposal. The House should reject it as well. end times article

10 Reasons the US should not torture prisoners; as if you should need them listed;

1. Military Leaders know torture does not produce reliable information.
2. Torture is not something the leaders of the free world should represent
3. When power is given to government agencies, it is almost always abused.
4. Human rights should be an important issue to any democratic government.
5. We have claimed moral superiority when sanctioning other countries for human rights violations such as torture.
6. We put our own soldiers and citizens in danger by advocating torture of prisoners, giving other countries to cite the use of torture by the US government as an example of how to treat Americans who are imprisoned or arrested in other countries, including troops who are captured.
7. Just because other countries use torture is not a good reason for us to do so.
8. It's against International Law.
9. It's against American Law.
10. It's just wrong period. If you have any sense of right and wrong, then you know this is true.

"What the world needs is not dogma but an attitude of scientific inquiry combined with a belief that the torture of millions is not desirable, whether inflicted by Stalin or by a Deity imagined in the likeness of the believer." --Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970)--

"Torture is banned but in two-thirds of the world's countries it is still being committed in secret. Too many governments still allow wrongful imprisonment, murder or "disappearance" to be carried out by their officials with impunity." --Peter Benenson--

"I remember going to an exhibit of photographs documenting the Japanese invasion of Nanking and other regions and looking at these photos, the decapitations, the torture, the pornographic poses - they would rape women and then photograph them." --Iris Chang--

"The healthy man does not torture others - generally it is the tortured who turn into torturers." --Carl G. Jung--

"Shamefully we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management, U.S. management." --Edward Kennedy--

"Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a totalitarian state. It was a country where people were murdered and tortured. So I'm looking at this through the eyes of the political prisoner in Baghdad, and from this point of view I'm very grateful to those who opened the gates of the prison and who stopped the killing and the torture." --Adam Michnik--

"Today we are engaged in a deadly global struggle for those who would intimidate, torture, and murder people for exercising the most basic freedoms. If we are to win this struggle and spread those freedoms, we must keep our own moral compass pointed in a true direction." --Barack Obama--

"I mean, we've had all these awful pictures from the prison in Iraq and these sort of memos floating around about justifying torture, all this kind of stuff. And it makes you want to take a shower, you know?" --Ron Reagan--

"We do, and there is a law in the United States - the Torture Convention - that prohibits the United States from deporting an individual to a country where there is a reasonable expectation that he will be subjected to torture - physical, mental or otherwise." --Jonathan Shapiro--

"To be sure, Article 31 of the Fourth Convention prohibits any "physical or moral coercion" of civilians "to obtain information from them," and there is a clear prohibition of torture, physical abuse, and denial of medical care, food, and shelter." --John Yoo--

"This is not to condone torture, which is still prohibited by the Torture Convention and federal criminal law." --John Yoo--

"The war against terrorism is a war against those who engage in torture." --Ed Markey--

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


The Blogger Elite

Some bloggers piss me off. I'm sure I piss some of them off. Thats cool by me. However at least I'm blogging just because I think blogging is a good way to instigate debate on important issues. I'm doing it because I WANT to blog. I'm not doing it because I think it will make me a lot of money, make me famous, or lead to a job as a writer somewhere.

Some of the hugh hewitt larger blogs hugh hewitt seem to exist solely to make people hugh hewitt believe that somehow their blogs are replacing mainstream hugh hewitt media. They recommend hugh hewitt that mainstream media should hugh hewitt be hiring bloggers like hugh hewitt.

If they hugh hewitt are so adamant that mainstream hugh hewitt media is falling apart and is hugh hewitt irrelevant, then why hugh hewitt are they so intent on hugh hewitt becoming what they hugh hewitt detest?

The larger blogs hugh hewitt are patting each other hugh hewitt on the back constantly hugh hewitt and becoming a group or clique hugh hewitt that is trying to control hugh hewitt all the blog traffic just as hugh hewitt mainstream media tries to control the hugh hewitt airwaves of radio hugh hewitt and television.

They just like mainstream hugh hewitt media, they hugh hewitt want to control what readers see and read. They have become exactly like hugh hewitt those they say they are hugh hewitt replacing.

But I won't mention hugh hewitt any names here, because I hugh hewitt have more integrity hugh hewitt than that.

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Oil for Food Scam includes American Companies

Ok, wanna know more about the connection bush administration has to oil and to saddam hussein? Oh don't get mje wrong the companies listed in this article spent a lot of money on lobbying BOTH parties. A lot of hands are dirty here.

Read about it here.

Condeleeza Rice is so connected, there's an oil tanker named after her.

FAQ about the investigations.

An Arab newspaper did publish, not long ago, the list of some 272 names of the beneficiaries from the alleged scam. The Russians, who were very close allies of the Saddam regime got $7.3 million. The French, who, like the Russians, were opposed to the invasion and occupation of Iraq, $3.7 million. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), says, in a 918-page document that the likes of such oil giants as “Chevron, Texaco, Mobil and Bay Oil – and three individuals – including Oscar S. Wyatt Jr of Houston were given vouchers and got 111 million barrels of oil between them from 1996 to 2003.

Was it illegal to take these vouchers?
Yes. If individuals and companies knowingly received profits from oil sales not approved by the Oil-for-Food program, they broke the rules of that program and violated the terms of U.N. Security Resolutions that established the program and the sanctions against Iraq, say investigators from the House International Relations Committee. In the case of U.N. employees, accepting bribes would also violate the rules of that body, experts say.

Whether individuals on the list will be prosecuted, however, would, in most cases, be the decision of his or her own government and the domestic laws of each nation. In the United States , as in some other nations, the sanctions became part of domestic law. Another key question in the American context would be whether these vouchers truly served as bribes that caused individuals to work on Saddam Hussein's behalf to modify U.S. policy. A series of laws, including the 1977 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act , regulates the overseas business practices of American citizens. In addition, U.S. firms could be prosecuted if they failed to receive the required approval from the U.S. Department of Treasury to purchase Iraqi oil.


GW Bush was huntin for some wmds and up through the ground come a bubblin crude. oil that is. black gold. texas tea. well the first thing you know ol gw's . . . well he already was a millionaire, ever since they put him in charge of an oil company and the saudis suddenly gave HIS oil company a lucrative drilling contract. nothing to do with his daddy bein president at the time or anything. pretty smart for a hillbilly.


How Iraq Got Stuck with Saddam

This article is from Knowledge News" If you don't already subscribe to this great newsletter, you are missing out! See what you've been missing . . .

The trial of Saddam Hussein began on Wednesday in Baghdad. He pled not guilty to charges that he killed some 150 Iraqis after an attempt on his life in 1982. He also said, "I do not respond to this so-called court. . . . I retain my constitutional right as the president of Iraq."

The trial is now in recess till November 28, to give Saddam more time to prepare his defense. He faces hanging if convicted--a long fall for the man who once ruled Iraq. How did Iraq get stuck with Saddam to begin with? Here's our look at those crucial events--the ones that shaped the country, and that challenge its new leaders now.

1917 - With the Ottoman Empire crumbling in World War I, western powers begin carving the Middle East into spheres of colonial influence. British forces enter Baghdad and replace the Ottoman provincial government with a British imperial one. The Ottomans had ruled the region since the 16th century, yet prior to Britain's arrival, "Iraq" was not a single political unit. The term had been used since the Middle Ages to refer to the area, but the Ottomans ruled the land as five provinces approximating its religious and ethnic divisions.

1920 - The emir Faysal I establishes an Arab government in Syria and is proclaimed king. Nationalists in Iraq instigate a revolt and proclaim Faysal's older brother, Abdullah, their king. The French expel Faysal from Syria, while the British suppress the revolt in Iraq.

1921 - Britain offers to make Faysal the Iraqi king. Faysal accepts, provided the Iraqi people agree. A plebiscite says they do, and Faysal takes the throne.

1922 - Britain and Iraq sign a treaty of alliance. The treaty satisfies neither the Iraqis--who notice that the British still have considerable say in their affairs--nor the British public, which opposes spending money on Iraq.

1925 - King Faysal signs the "Organic Law," establishing a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary government. Yet neither monarchy nor parliament is organic to the region. Both will survive for only 33 years.

1932 - The League of Nations formally admits Iraq as an independent state. With independence achieved, Iraq's numerous political parties turn on each other.

1933 - Several hundred members of a small Christian community are killed in clashes with Iraqi troops. An ailing King Faysal counsels moderation but cannot control the situation. The king dies in Switzerland and is succeeded by his young and inexperienced son, King Ghazi.

1934-35 - Tribal insurrections, spurred by opposition leaders, lead to the fall of three governments in two years. The insurrections reflect two critical problems: the questionable legitimacy of a political system largely imposed from outside and the country's ethnic and religious diversity.

1939 - King Ghazi is killed in a car accident and is succeeded by his 4-year-old son, Faysal II. His uncle, Emir Abdullah, serves as regent. World War II breaks out in Europe. Despite paying lip service to the Anglo-Iraqi alliance, Iraq's prime minister, General Nuri, declares Iraq "nonbelligerent." The army dominates Iraqi politics.

1940 - Iraq sides with pan-Arab leaders who oppose British power and who are secretly negotiating with the Nazis.

1941 - British forces rout the Iraqi army and make Iraqi leaders and their pan-Arab supporters flee the country. Under duress from the British, Iraq declares war on Germany and the Axis powers and helps the Allies.

1945 - World War II ends. The regent, Abdullah, calls for reforms that would make Iraq more genuinely democratic. His call is embraced by a generation of young reformers, yet vested interests block any change.

1948 - Salih Jabr, Iraq's first Shi'ite prime minister, negotiates a new and more equal treaty with the British. Yet popular protests promptly compel repudiation of the treaty and, ultimately, Jabr's resignation. Iraq participates with other Arab nations in the First Arab-Israeli War, which ends in bitter humiliation for the Arab states.

1952 - Opposition leaders, students, and extremists spur a popular uprising that spins out of control. The regent calls in the army, and the country falls under martial law. The government signs a profit-sharing agreement with the Iraq Petroleum Company, despite protests from opposition groups that want to nationalize the oil industry.

1958 - The "Free Officers," a group of young military officers operating in secret cells, stages a coup, overthrows the monarchy, and proclaims a republic. The king, the crown prince, and many members of the royal family are executed. Abd-al-Karim Qasim, leader of the Free Officers, assumes control of the government. It soon becomes apparent that Iraq is a republic in name only.

1961 - In an apparent attempt to divert attention from problems at home, Qasim advances a claim to Iraqi sovereignty over Kuwait. The claim has little historical basis and serves primarily to anger Britain, Kuwait, and other Arab nations. Qasim nationalizes the oil industry.

1963 - A faction of the army cooperates with the Iraqi branch of the Arab Socialist Ba'ath ("Renaissance") Party in a revolt against Qasim's regime. Qasim is executed, and a National Council for Revolutionary Command is created under Colonel Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr. Ba'ath leaders install Abd-al-Salam Arif as president. Arif promptly rallies the military, has Ba'ath leaders arrested, and consolidates his power. Forced underground, the Ba'ath party reorganizes under al-Bakr, helped by a young Saddam Hussein.

1966 - President Arif dies in a helicopter accident and is succeeded by his older brother, Abd-al-Rahman Arif, who ignores calls from Ba'ath and other opposition leaders for elections and for getting the army out of politics.

1968 - A faction of the army and Ba'ath leaders overthrow the government again. President Arif surrenders and leaves the country. The new regime forms the Revolutionary Command Council (RCC), which makes al-Bakr president. Al-Bakr gives considerable power to Saddam Hussein and consolidates his own by forcing military leaders to flee. A Kurdish uprising begins but is quickly suppressed. The Ba'ath party becomes the central force in Iraqi politics.

1970 - Ba'ath party leaders meet with leaders of the Kurds. The government promises that by 1974 it will recognize the Kurds as a national group entitled to self-rule.

1974 - The promises of 1970 go unkept, and the Kurds revolt. The shah of Iran supports the Kurds, primarily because he wants to pressure the Iraqi government into renegotiating a 1937 treaty that gives Iraq control over the valuable Shatt al-Arab shipping channel.

1975 - Saddam Hussein meets with the shah of Iran, and the two quickly come to an agreement: Iraq will share control of the Shatt al-Arab, and Iran will stop supporting the Kurds. The agreement puts an end to the Kurdish war.

1978 - Pursuing the Ba'ath goal of Arab unity, Iraq and Syria sign a "charter for joint national action." The charter says the two nations will merge their military forces and suggests they'll eventually form one political entity. Negotiations on forming the union stall, however, as leaders on both sides work to remain on top. The quick engagement-turned-annulment leads to bad feelings all around.

1979 - Al-Bakr resigns, and Saddam Hussein, who has assumed increasing control, succeeds him. Not two weeks later, the government announces that it has uncovered a conspiracy to overthrow Saddam's new regime. Several members of the RCC are arrested, a special court is set up, and 22 people are executed. In Iran, a Shi'ite Islamic movement led by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini overthrows the shah and proclaims a policy of "exporting the revolution." Clashes along the Iran-Iraq border become frequent.

1980 - Iraqi forces invade Iran, setting off a war between the two that will last eight years and create an Iraqi debt of $80 billion, with about half owed to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. After some initial Iraqi successes, a stalemate ensues.

1983 - Iranian forces penetrate Iraq. Kurds in the northeastern provinces cooperate with them. In response, Iraq deploys chemical weapons and bombs Iranian oil holdings in the Persian Gulf.

1987 - Iraq regains the upper hand in the war, partly by acquiring arms from France and the Soviet Union. Iraq also enjoys diplomatic and military support from the United States, which bombs Iranian ships and oil platforms and provides information about Iranian troop movements.

1988 - The Iran-Iraq War ends. Ultimately, the two sides make peace by reverting to agreements made in 1975. Saddam begins to rebuild the Iraqi military. He also begins chemical weapons attacks against the Kurds, massacring between 50,000 and 100,000 people in northern Iraq.

1990 - Angered by Kuwaiti and Saudi refusals to forgive Iraq's war debt, Saddam resurrects Iraq's claim to sovereignty over Kuwait. Iraqi forces invade. The U.N. Security Council imposes economic sanctions against Iraq, and U.S. troops arrive in Saudi Arabia. Saddam declares Kuwait an Iraqi province.

1991 - A multinational coalition led by the United States launches "Operation Desert Storm." The attack begins with an air campaign, but ground forces soon follow. Iraq withdraws from Kuwait and accepts a cease-fire dictated by the U.N. Almost immediately, Saddam flouts the cease-fire's terms, and economic sanctions remain in place. Kurds in the north and Shi'ites in the south rebel, but are put down with brutal force. In an attempt to protect the Kurds, the United States creates a "no-fly" zone in northern Iraq. U.S. forces establish a southern "no-fly" zone the next year.

1996 - Because of a growing humanitarian crisis stemming from the ongoing sanctions, the U.N. allows Iraq to sell $1 billion worth of oil every 90 days, on the condition that the money be used for humanitarian relief.

1997 - The U.N. disarmament commission determines that Iraq continues to hide information about its development of chemical and biological weapons.

1998 - Iraq ends all cooperation with the U.N. weapons inspection program. To force compliance and destroy weapons facilities, U.S. and British forces bomb Iraqi military targets and oil refineries.

1999 - The U.N. Security Council proposes a new arms inspection plan that could lead to the suspension of economic sanctions. Iraq rejects the plan.

2003 - The United States and Great Britain argue that Iraq continues to hide prohibited weapons. U.S. and British forces invade and topple Saddam Hussein's government. Eight months after Baghdad's fall, U.S. forces capture Saddam Hussein. No weapons of mass destruction are found.

Steve Sampson
October 19, 2005

With just a single one-time support payment, you can become a lifelong member of our community of learners. You get: Immediate access to our 4 ebooks: World Tour, Americana, SciencePhiles, and Almanac. Each brings you closer to the fascinating and fundamental knowledge behind today's top news. Immediate access to the rest of our content archives, more than 3 years' worth of explorations. Each and every word of our KnowledgeNews email issues--free every weekday in their entirety to our lifetime members only. For as long as you choose, we'll support your learning passion. All for a one-time payment of just $34.95--no renewals, ever!

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off

Missing Children - More Smoke and Mirrors

You know, we search daily for new technologies and techniques to use in finding missing children. We work hard at finding REAL solutions. The we have other organizations that simply come up with stuff that is just PR and BS. I'm sorry, there is just no other way to put it. It is very frustrating.

We have proven that having a search team that goes out to help find missing children works. That actually being there to help is what works. We have found enough missing and abducted children to prove it. We have proven that coordinating volunteers from the community works. We have proven that businesses will provide resources like helicopters and communications to help us find missing children.

With Child ID Kits, we have studied what happens when a child is first reported missing or abducted and have met with detectives to come up with a list of types of information they need right away to help them search for and find a LIVE child. We offer that kit free of charge on our website. Click here to get one.

Actually BEING THERE when a child is missing and having information that will help find the child safe and sound is the key to finding missing children. That simple. There is no substitute to actually being there to help. You can't find missing children while sitting in your office or living room. You can't do it with fancy gadgets and clever marketing schemes.

Fingerprints: No child we know of has EVER been found or even positively identified by the child's fingerprints. Think about it logically. You show up to help me find my missing child. I say, "It's ok, here is their fingerprints, go find them." Where do you start? So those little id cards with a fingerprint on the back and a tiny photo on the front are totally worthless in the search for a missing child. You cannot even blow up the little photo into a flyer size picture. If I have 100 volunteers waiting to search for your child, what are they going to do? Take turns holding the ID Card?

DNA: See the above paragraph. Unless you are a Witch or a Warlock or a Psychic, you can't find someone's missing child with a lock of their hair. DNA is for identifying DEAD CHILDREN. Enough said.

And now, the latest revolutionary method of finding missing and abducted children has arrived! See part of news story below;

Iris detection approved to locate missing children: The Children's Identification and Location Database (CHILD) Project is a secure nationwide network and registry using iris recognition biometric technology, the quickest and most accurate identification technology available. "This is the 21st century version of fingerprinting," Bellotti said. "Having a system like this at our disposal will allow us to quickly and positively identify missing children."

OH! Problem solved! I can go find a new job now. All the detective has to do if your child is missing is walk around with EYEPRINTS and they can find your missing or abducted child! What a concept!

Again, let me repeat. This type of technology, iris recognition, fingerprints, dna, is for identifying the remains of dead children. The only other possible use is if they are fairly certain they have already found the missing child thats been missing a long time, certain enough to get a court order. Then they can take that child's fingerprints, dna, or retina scan and match it to the one of the missing child. That is of course dependant on the missing child's parent have that data to go on. DNA can be obtained from the mother of the missing child and will be an exact match to the child's DNA. A retina scan cannot, therefore even in the remotest instance that ANY of this is useful, it's DNA.

But these organizations make deals with the companies that promote these products and in return for recognition and financial support put out false information to the public they know doesn't understand the problem anyway. They know the project won't actaully help solve the problem, but they get to give the impression they are finding missing children when they have never physically been on a search for a missing child. Their systems haven't been the deciding factor in a missing child's recovery either. "Anytime they are remotely involved, like putting the child's picture on a website, They claim they helped recover the missing child."

What have we learned?




As for me, I guess I'll just have to keep finding them one at a time until someone realizes these points and puts up the funding to really find missing and abducted children without all the hype.

Comment on our Missing Children Message Board
Donate to Kidsearch
Kidsearch Network Website
Missing Children Blog


Government Spying on us again

Ok, this is really big brother, oppressive, spying, cloak and dagger bs stuff here and it should piss everyone off. At least if you care about freedom and are against your government spying on you.

When you bought your color laser printer from Xerox, HP, or one of the others, did you read anywhere on it that as you print documents, it was going to print hidden code into the document about when and where it was printed and who printed it? Funny, wasn't on my purchase agreement either.

Read this story from the washington post;

Printers output secret barcode

By Mike Musgrove
The Washington Post

WASHINGTON — It sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it isn't. The pages coming out of your color printer may contain hidden information that could be used to track you down if you ever cross the U.S. government.

Last year, an article in PC World magazine pointed out that printouts from many color laser printers contained yellow dots scattered across the page, viewable only with a special kind of flashlight. The article quoted a senior researcher at Xerox saying that the dots contain information useful to law-enforcement authorities, a secret digital "license tag" for tracking down criminals.

The content of the coded information was supposed to be a secret, available only to agencies looking for counterfeiters who use color printers.

Now, the secret is out.

Yesterday, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco consumer-privacy group, said it had cracked the code used in a widely used line of Xerox printers, an invisible barcode of sorts that contains the serial number of the printer as well as the date and time a document was printed.

With the Xerox printers, the information appears as a pattern of yellow dots, each only a millimeter wide and visible only with a magnifying glass and a blue light.

The EFF said it has identified similar coding on pages printed from nearly every major printer manufacturer, including Hewlett-Packard, though its team has so far cracked the codes for only one type of Xerox printer.

The U.S. Secret Service acknowledged yesterday that the markings, which are not visible to the human eye, are there, but it played down the use for invading privacy.

"It's strictly a countermeasure to prevent illegal activity specific to counterfeiting," agency spokesman Eric Zahren said. "It's to protect our currency and to protect people's hard-earned money."

It is unclear whether the yellow-dot codes have been used to make an arrest. And no one would say how long the codes have been in use. But Seth Schoen, the EFF technologist who led the organization's research, said he had seen the coding on documents produced by printers that were at least 10 years old.

"It seems like someone in the government has managed to have a lot of influence in printing technology," he said.

Xerox spokesman Bill McKee confirmed the existence of the hidden codes, but he said the company was simply assisting an agency that asked for help. McKee said the program was part of a cooperation with government agencies, competing manufacturers and a "consortium of banks," but would not provide further details.

HP said in a statement that it is involved in anti-counterfeiting measures and supports the cooperation between the printer industry and those working to reduce counterfeiting.

Schoen said that the existence of the encoded information could be a threat to people who live in repressive governments or those who have a legitimate need for privacy.

"It's disturbing that something on this scale, with so many privacy implications, happened with such a tiny amount of publicity," Schoen said.

If our government can just make clandestine deals with manufacturers that help them spy on us in other ways, they will do so. Makes you wonder what these companies get in return for their cooperation doesn't it. Like with cell phones. They insert a chip so they can locate you within 100 feet at any time at the government's request, but of course it's only to be used if you have an emergency so they can come help you. Anyone who believes that giving the government these tools is ok, you need your head examined. These tools have the potential to be abused by law enforcement and by our government and by the companies they are in bed with. If you think they will not be abused then take the rose colored glasses off granny.

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Maury Povich Show - NCMEC - PatienTrak at it again

Here we go again. As long as it LOOKS good the ncmec will put it out in front of the public. It doesn't really have to work well. It doesn't really have to find children who are actually missing. All it has to do is have the APPEARANCE of working so the ncmec can LOOK like they are doing more than they are.

"Maury Show highlights Missing Children topic and Child ID Alert included with PatienTrak(tm) Digital Portable Health Record"

Sounds good right. Lets all celebrate. Once again the ncmec has solved all the problems associated with missing children. hooray! This is like the upteenth time they have endorsed some company's "for profit" project to get people to buy it in the belief that it will save their child's life if they are abducted or missing. This one is "only $29.95" and no more worries! hooray!

They go on to say this about missing children when talking about the upcoming povich show about missing children; "Statistics show approximately 730,000 children are reported missing or abducted every year and the number is growing."

They don't mention that in actuality there are about 10,000 cases per year where the child was in real danger. A high enough number for concern, but not high enough for the ncmec to tell people about and still get 32 million a year in funding.

"The value of adding child protection software to our portable health record offers parents greater protection for their children" said Robbin Hunter, PatienTrak President. "What if the child has medical problems and medicines that need to be taken, PatienTrak can provide this information in a crisis situation to law enforcement" offered Michael Wolff, PatienTrak, CEO. "We are glad to be a part of this effort".

Truth be told, I don't think patientrak was selling all that well before adding this and partnering with the ncmec and maury povich. It's $29.99. They will sell more now due to the fear that the ncmec creates in parents.

Kidsearch Network Website where child id kits are free!
Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Now this is hilarious

First Click here to go to

Type in the word Failure.

Hit the button, "I'm feeling lucky"

Stuff I bet you don't know about animals

Giant flying foxes, which are a type of bat, that live in Indonesia have wingspans of nearly six feet. No horror movie coming out about that one?

A blue whale's tongue is so large that fifty people could stand on it. Until he swallows.

Bats always turn left when exiting a cave. And the older ones never ever use their blinker either. Oops, different topic. Nevermind.

If you spray an antiseptic spray on a polar bear, its fur will turn purple. If anyone will go out and verify this one personally, email me about it. If you can.

In the last 30 years, only seven people have been killed by a polar bear in Canada. One of them was the guy that found out about that last fact.

A chicken with red earlobes will produce brown eggs, and a chicken with white earlobes will produce white eggs. Is that true?

In 1681, the last dodo bird died. Not true. Look at Congress.

In the 1800's cats were used to deliver mail. In 1879, in Belgium 37 cats were used to deliver mail to villages, however they found that the cats were not disciplined enough to do this. Like, duh! Our government employees aren't either.

A chicken once had its head cut off and survived for over eighteen months, headless. How long will Bush last if Carl Rove is indicted? If you want to verify how the chicken ate, etc. Click Here.

In 2002, dogs have killed more people in the U.S. than the Great White shark has killed in the past 100 years. I knew the great white shark was gettin a bad rap.

In 1916, an elephant was tried and hung for murder in Erwin, Tennessee. Tennessee. That explains everything, but Click here if you must learn more.

A giraffe is able to clean its ears with its own tongue. ewwwwwww!

Charles Darwin spent 39 years studying earthworms. When did he have time for the theory of evolution? I refuse to believe in a theory written by anyone who speant 39 years studying earthworms.

Fried spiders taste like nuts. I'm not even gonna comment here.

Scientists have actually performed brain surgery on cockroaches. I don't think they should be allowed to do that to our elected officials.

There are more pigs than humans in Denmark. Disclaimer Not intended to be a racial slur.

Every year, 100 million sharks are killed by people. But none by Lawyers. Professional Courtesy.

More people die from eating sharks then from being eaten by them. This is due to a poison in shark meat. Makes you wanna go Hmmmm

Sharks can sense a drop of blood from a mile away. As can most attorneys.

A cow releases about 125 gallons of gas per day. That's about $375 worth of gas. How do we harness that? Cows can detect odors up to five miles away. But I bet they aren't happy about it due to the last fact.

Things I just thought you should know.

PS: Cats taste like chicken.

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Internet Marketing Scams and Schemes

Now this really pisses me off! So many people trying to make a buck on the Internet, some trying to do it legitimately, some trying to scam everyone, and others that are just plain stupid.

Let start with the first category, the ones who want to make a buck legitimately. This is a good thing. However, you need to know certain things.

We don't like popups!

Ads that flash on and off constantly are nauseating!

We do not want ads to talk to us. This is not an improvement.

Forcing us to watch commercials before seeing your content is following the same business plan that drove us from tv to the Internet in the first place. Copying a failing business plan is probably not a great idea.

Now let's talk about the scammers. These are the people who will work harder to make an illegal buck than they would have to making a legitimate buck. Therefore they also belong in the stupid category.

The Nigerian/Africa I'm a relative of a deposed dictator, we want you to receive millions into your bank account scam. Anyone who doesn't already know this is a scam and answers these mailers deserves to be taken for every dime they have because they are too stupid to have money in the first place. As to the ones sending it out; Get an original idea will you? At least make it interesting.

Phishing At least these guys weren't as stupid as most scammers, but everyone who is on the Internet should learn what they need to know to be safe. Look up how to protect your privacy or Internet Safety into google and do a little reading will you? If you do you will not be trapped by these con artists. Then we won't have to listen to your whining about being scammed because you were too lazy to read.

Spammers Ok, I understand some guy in a 3rd world country sending out millions of emails to make $40 a day because in his country that might be a fortune, however the guys here that send a million emails a day, work to cover their tracks, set up systems to track what they are sending and who is responding, and takes the risk of being arrested to make that same $40 a day is just ridiculous. Maybe some make more than that, but for all of that work they could run legitimate websites and make more money.

A note for those that complain about spammers You see it everywhere, people blogging, writing into forums, congress getting into the act, all wanting to stop SPAM. The worst part is most of the complainers don't even know why we need to get rid of spam. They think it's because they get a lot of it in their inbox. Wrong answer. Junk mail is worse because it goes in my trash can and then I have to take out the trash and all those trees they wasted on sending me snailmail spam. With email spam, you hit delete. Wow, what an inconvenience. Get over it. The reason spam is a problem is the fact they send out millions of emails creating more traffic on the entire web, slowing down normal traffic. That is the real threat that spam poses, not whether you get too many unwanted emails.

Now let's get to the last group, the stupid people marketing on the web. First of all, if you built one or two websites in your entire life, quit giving advice. Stop it right now. You know nothing. Realize it. Live with it. Try to learn more. But do not give advice please. There is already enough bad advice floating around and that is probably even worse than the spam problem.

I repeat the above statement; We do not like popups. That means giving us several popups because you knew we wouldn't buy anything from the first popup is not better than giving me one popup. You would not be building 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 50th popups if you thought the first one would make sales. Giving us popunders, exit consoles, and other creative codes you found on some other idiots website and copied doesn't work either. This especially goes for those popups you are real proud of, the ones where the X to close them is off screen so we have to drag it over so we can close it. That makes us love you even more. We are so impressed by this creativity we'll certainly buy from you now. IDIOT!

No right click What idiot thinks by disabling the right click somehow does some good? It's just annoying. If I wanted to steal your content, it's called, VIEW SOURCE. If you didn't disable that, why disable the right click? What a waste of time. There are a lot of legitimate uses for a right click on a webpage that have nothing to do with stealing your content like neo-trace to find out more about the owner of the website, blocking that means you don't want me to know about you so I assume I shouldn't buy from you because why are you hiding? Another is, not everyone uses the back button. some right click and choose back. Disabling it annoys me and again I'm not buying from people who annoy me.

Ads that race around the screen blocking the content on the website you built. Again, this bit of creativity you would call it is moronic, childish, and just bad marketing. Again IF IT ANNOYS US WE DO NOT WANT TO BUY FROM YOU! If you are so bored that you have to search the web for creative code you can steal to use in your website, then get a hobby . . . other than building websites that suck. If you are so desperate because nothing you are doing is making money that you will use these stupid tactics, then try to learn more from legitimate webmasters who are making money without all this BS. Learn something. What a concept.

Disabling the back button This is one of my favorites. I find your website in the search engine. I might say wow, great website. Bookmark it to return later, then hit the back button to go back to what I was doing. What happens? It just refreshes the page and won't go back to the website I was at before. OMG! I'm trapped! I'll have to buy something now! You built that code into the website believing that would make someone buy something? Are you a complete moron? Of course you are.

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Things That Just Piss Me Off

You know what I'm pissed off about today? Nothing, except the fact that I can't find something that pisses me off yet this morning so I can post it here for you to agree or disagree with. The newspapers and blogs today are just rehashing the same ol ****! Therefore I refuse to do so. Gimme something new world!

Oh well, if it's like any other day, it won't be long now.

Shrink wrap! That pisses me off but how much can you talk about shrinkwrap and why manufacturers want it to be difficult for us to actually USE the products they sell us?

Let's see . . . Paper Cuts. Now those really piss me off. Thank God for computers.

Stubbing my toe pisses me off but it wouldn't make a great article.

Women! Not enough room on my blog. Check This Blog

Answering machines piss me off, OFTEN! Especially if there is music and a bunch of needless nonsense on them that I have to listen to before I can leave a message that is short and to the point.

The lack of having an answering machine or a voicemail so I CAN leave a message!

Phone systems that have computer automated responses, especially those that ask me to press 1 for english!

Microsoft! do I have to even explain?

Webmasters who built one or two websites and then think they are experts and spend all days on forums giving bad advice to other new webmasters. The blind leading the blind.

Corporations that actually believe a college degree and using front page are the requirements needed to hire a good webmaster. First of all the professors that taught them have never built websites that make money in 99% of the cases, therefore the student who learned from them doesn't know how either. Secondly, no self-respecting webmaster would use frontpage to build websites with. That program is for the newest of newbies and of course college-educated webdummies.

Well can't think of anything else at the moment. My brain is full. Somebody make a comment and piss me off. I dare ya!

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Americans, even those that are disaster victims, have it very good.

We've all read about the earthquake in Pakistan. 20,000 or more people dead and thousands more stranded and not evacuated yet. Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz of Pakistan put the death toll at 23,000, up from an estimated 20,000 the day before. Of the 51,000 people injured in the earthquake, only 3,110 have been evacuated by helicopter, according to Pakistani officials.

Americans complained about the evacuation process during Katrina? What would Americans have been saying if the earthquake crisis in Pakistan were happening here?

In one hamlet on the Pakistani side of Kashmir, 100 miles northeast of Islamabad, Asghar Hussain Shah, a 49-year-old schoolteacher, shivered in a thin cardigan beside his broken house. He, his wife and children huddled under a sodden tarpaulin to escape the rain that fell over the village, called Mohri Furman Shah. "We cannot sleep in the house," he said. "All the men and women are frightened." Mr. Shah said his extended family of seven others has camped out for three nights and were now trying to keep dry under makeshift shelters beneath the trees. The hamlet emerged with just six dead after all 300 children at the local school escaped before the school collapsed. But it is now Day 4 and no help has been offered to the hamlet, which sits on a main road.

Beneath trees. Not inside a building as our Katrina survivors were. They aren't calling out for the government to be blamed. They are not saying their government failed them. They aren't holding their hand out expecting handouts as if it were a right.

Katrina was a disaster. People were killed. People were injured. People lost their homes. Yes the government could have done a better job at responding. But let's keep it in perspective. When a hurricane is coming, people are told to put away food and water for 5 days. The federal response and evacuations began on the 4th day.

Thousands of families in Himilayan Villages in Pakistan will be lucky if anyone can reach them in that same 4 days. They won't call it racism. They won't blame the government for a natural disaster. They will be grateful for whatever aid reaches them, whenever it gets there.

Maybe there are some Americans who should reflect on this.

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off

"When the government fears the people, that is LIBERTY. When people fear the government, that is TYRANNY."

There is a lot of talk going around about picking a conservative judge means they will adhere to the constitution better than a liberal judge. What that really means is they will adhere to the conservative's view or interpretation of the constitution.

Conservatives are in the majority right now in congress and in the white house. As a result of that, police can now execute search warrants by "notifying a judge" instead of having to "ask a judge for permission". They can order a library to give them a list of the books you read and under penalty of law the library can't even tell you about it. They can and have held American citizens in jail without the right to an attorney, without being charged, and if they do get an attorney, the feds can listen in on the conversation.

All of this has happened on the current administration's watch and they say that picking a judge for the supreme court with their values will mean one that upholds the constitution. I don't find anywhere in the constitution or bill of rights that suggests the things in the patriot act are in line with the thinking of our forefathers when they wrote them. Nothing in the patriot act is compatible with the "spirit" of either document.

"A politician will do anything to keep his job - even become a patriot." [ William Randolph Hearst]

These same patriot act supporters will say, yes, but times have changed and with terrorism, we need to give up some of our rights and our privacy in order to be safe.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." [ Benjamin Franklin ]

The right to a trial and the right to an attorney, NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE, is a basic American principal and part of essential liberty. If we torture prisoners and deny rights to them, then we have become what we fear and hate. We become that which we fight.

You think we are winning the war on terrorism? Then you are not opening your eyes and don't understand the principals this country was founded on. Every right we give up, every freedom we give up, every bit of privacy we give up, is another victory for the terrorists. The patriot act itself is the terrorists declaration of victory. They sought to destroy freedom and our politicians helped them take it away from us and they continue to do so a little bit at a time so you won't notice.

They have used fear to deny civil liberties on the basis that they just want to protect us.

"Naturally, the common people don't want war ... but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country." [Hermann Goering]

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be lead to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." [ H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) ]

If this same group of people who support the patriot act put forth a judge who believes the way they do, then the judge will be off the mark as well. You cannot believe the patriot act is justified and believe in the constitution or bill of rights at the same time. If you do, then you don't understand one or the other.

"Any law which violates the indefeasible rights of man is essentially unjust and tyrannical; it is not a law at all." [ Maximilien Robespierre ]

This is the same group of people who believe that not supporting EVERYTHING the president does is unpatriotic.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." [ Theodore Roosevelt ]

"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." [ Edward Abbey ]

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Why Fast Food isn't Fast

Ok, this really pisses me off! You go to get some fast food right? yeah sure, fast. Anyway, you're hungry. You go in and there is a long line, but you decide to stay anyway because you are HUNGRY. It can't take long. You wait for like 10 minutes in line while some idiot gets to the register, orders, then has to dig in their purse or pocket for EXACT change.

They will count out pennies, nickels, dimes, then back into the purse or pocket for even more change until they have it just right! What are you trying to do? Convince us you know how to count? We already have the problem of the guy or girl working behind the counter that has to have a cash register with pictures on it instead of numbers so they can understand it. We already have someone who couldn't get an order right or hear your order the first time so you have to repeat it. Then we have MR/S EXACT CHANGE!

Then to top it off, you are almost to the counter when another familiar figure gets to the front. They have been in line for ten minutes, the dummy behind the counter says sweetly, "May I help you?". The person in line then looks up at the menu as if seeing it for the very first time! "Ummmmm . . . Let me see . . . What do you want honey? . . . Give me a minute to make up my mind . . . Ok, we'll have . . . no wait . . . that looks good . . . how much is that?" "It's written on the menu, sir" "Oh yeah, now I see it. Can I have that with no pickles?" "Yes". "Ok then I want it with no catchup, no lettuce, and lots of pickles, heh heh, changed my mind on those pickles" Then they read the order back to the customer and it starts all over again.

If those two weren't enough, we now have the guy right in front of suddenly turn from a pimply faced geek into Don Juan right before our very eyes. He's sees the pimply plump girl behind the counter and goes into his "suave" mode. "Hi there, Honey . . . You sure look nice today" "Thank you, can I take your order please?" "Oh sure honey, I'll have a hot waitress on toast to go with nothing on it" "Giggle" " . . . you get the picture. It's just too ugly from here and only gets worse.

If a person ever gets killed in a fast food line because of this behavior, I will not be surprised in the least. You could use the "Extreme Hunger" defense and of course claim you were just cleaning up the gene pool.

This one was for my favorite, loyal reader, Chuck, who told me I talk too much about Curious George the President.

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Learn to speak lamb

I told a buddy of mine to come up with a weird key phrase to google. He said "Learn to speak Lamb". So I googled it. The first link at the top of the results was "Learn to speak French". How appropriate. Shortest Book in the world. great French Victories. Wanna learn to be a lamb? Learn french.

My Buddy's Blog is here.

Rolling Stones - Sweet NeoCon

Lyrics to the Stones song Sweet Neo Con.

(M. Jagger/K. Richards)

You call yourself a Christian
I think that you're a hypocrite
You say you are a patriot
I think that you're a crock of shit

And listen, I love gasoline
I drink it every day
But it's getting very pricey
And who is going to pay

How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con.... Yeah

It's liberty for all
'Cause democracy's our style
Unless you are against us
Then it's prison without trial

But one thing that is certain
Life is good at Haliburton
If you're really so astute
You should invest at Brown & Root.... Yeah

How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con
If you turn out right
I'll eat my hat tonight

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah....

It's getting very scary
Yes, I'm frightened out of my wits
There's bombers in my bedroom
Yeah and it's giving me the shits

We must have loads more bases
To protect us from our foes
Who needs these foolish friendships
We're going it alone

How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con
Where's the money gone
In the Pentagon

Yeah ha ha ha
Yeah, well, well

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah...
Neo con

Click here and then click the top link to hear the song.

Boy George Who? Arrested? Drugs?

And we care . . . why? What is it about the media, well what is it about people who read this kind of news? This is important? Boy George? Important?

It's the same people who went to the Michael Jackson trial saying he was innocent simply because he's a star and they like him.

Had he been convicted they still wouldn't have cared about the children he molested. They would have said he was framed and never would have believed him guilty.

Why do people worship celebrities like they are special or something? They aren't. Most of them are way more screwed up than the homeless guys you see on the street talking to themselves. The only thing worse than these celebs is the fans that worship them.

If boy george wasn't a star once upon a time way back when, he'd probably be the guy trying to wash your windshield at a red light. But as it is, today he is taking up space in newspapers because he uses drugs. Well, there is Rush Limbaugh to compare him to and he gets lots of radio time. Hmmm. Do drugs, molest children, get indicted, be famous. Good message to send to our children.

Jealous George

Dr. Mohammed ElBaradei gets the Nobel Peace Prize even after bush has been trying to get him removed. What's wrong GW? Did you think someone was going to give YOU a peace prize?

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off

Cronies, Phonies, and Closet Patriots

When will everyone get to the point where they admit gw bush does not care about putting qualified people in important positions? When will they admit that he only cares about promoting the people who helped him get selected? (not a typo).

You have indictments against the leader of the house, investigations into insider trading by another leading republicrook, you have a top appointee to fema that can't even get taking care of horses right, you have a vp that openly gives no-bid contracts to his former employer, an ambassador to the UN appointed by bush who helped him circumvent the law by excusing the US from the geneva convention, you have an appointee of Bush's to the SEC that believes corporations are too regulated which flys in the face of all the recent disclosures about corporations cheating investors and ripping off people's pensions, an appointee to the supreme court with no experience except being gw's personal attorney, and now he tries to appoint flanigan, who also helped him get around the geneva convention AND has ties to tyco, who had executives ripping off investors, and ties to the lobbyist under investigation, abramoff. Now flanigan withdrew from the nomination, so all is good there I guess. Gw will have another crony ready to take his place.

Are you bush supporters going to tell me all of that is a leftist plot to make george bush look bad? He looks bad on his own. He needs no help whatsoever to look bad. I think the republibloggers and other supporters of bush know and realize you were wrong about bush, but to keep from looking like you might be flip-flopping on something, you will continue to spin the news to defend him even at the expense of the citizens of this country. Is your fear of being thought to be wrong so great? Is it greater than your love for this country?

You're all closet patriots! Come out of the closet! Call your parents, tell them how you feel. Fess up. Get it over with. Bush wasn't the guy you thought he was. You were wrong. Admit it. You'll feel so much better.

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off

Create a threat, then sell the solution!

This is exactly what I meant in my last article. Comparing the marketing plan of software companies that are supposed to protect our computers to the marketing plan of GW Bush's Homeland Security Department that is supposed to be protecting our country.

First PSP Virus ... Sort Of
Hot off the wires from Symantec PR comes a notice about the first virus discovered for Sony's PlayStation Portable. "Trojan.PSPBrick," Symantec says, is a low-level threat (only 1 on its 1-to-5 scale) that has not been confirmed to have infected any of these handheld video-game machines. Kind of like an orange alert, or is it a purple alert? Can't seem to remember that color code.

Symantec's announcement also notes that, by default, PSPs can't even play any software beyond Sony-authorized releases -- that is, you'd have to hack your PSP to allow this trojan to get on board. Naturally, PSPBrick apparently presents itself as a PSP-hacking tool that will let users/victims play other games. Instead, it "deletes system files and renders the machine inoperable." I deny the rumor that this virus is connected to Al Queda in any way!

(History may offer a relevant parallel here: Back in 2000, Symantec noted the emergence of the first virus for Palm OS handhelds, then began selling an antivirus utility for handhelds. Imagine that. A virus is discovered by the company, then they offer the solution. Kind of like Homeland Security for your PlayStation.

Since then, according to Symantec's virus library, a total of four Palm viruses have ever emerged, and none since 2001.) Since 2001? No attacks/viruses since then. Makes you want to go . . . Hmmm

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


More Weapons of Mass Distraction

The President went back to his favorite topic, the only one where his approval rating is above 40%, the war on terrorism in his speech.

He claims that ten attacks by terroists have been thwarted since 9-11, leading one to believe that Homeland Security is on the job. However, most of those ten, if not all ten, were thwarted by foreign governments, not by the existance of Homeland Insecurity.

It reminds me of the product Norton Crash Guard. You take a perfectly good computer that has only crashed once or twice in a whole year, install Norton Crash Guard, and you will get a popup every single day telling you that crash guard has saved you from like 19 computer crashes.

If the US is my computer, GW Bush is my popup.

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off


Do you wonder why Bloggers and others get so frustrated with the American Public?

These are the people at home answering the phone and talking to the pollsters. These are the people we are trying to wake up. These are the people who will decide who the next president will be. These are the people our soldiers are out there protecting. These are the people who think they know all about politics because they read the newspaper and watch tv.

Click here for the video

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off

Harriet Miers, who did you get out of jail late at night?

From the NYTimes; "Ms. Miers, meanwhile, continued her rounds of Capitol Hill. Senator Mike DeWine, Republican of Ohio, pronounced her "tough as nails" after an hourlong meeting with her. Responding to criticism that Ms. Miers had never been a judge, Mr. DeWine praised the breadth of her practical experience in the White House and in her long career as a private lawyer. "She is somebody who has gone out late at night to get someone out of jail," Mr. DeWine said she had told him. "

Just wondering, if she is GW Bush's personal attorney, how many OTHER clients does she have? Was this a referral to getting GW out on drunk driving or something? The question just hit me when I read the article. Thought it was a funny way for someone to show they are qualified to sit on the supreme court. The fact that she got GW or someone out of jail late at night isn't much of a qualification.

On Wednesday, however, the Democrats mostly stood back as conservatives took aim at the selection of Ms. Miers. Mr. Will, a conservative essayist, made the case for her rejection in a syndicated column published on Wednesday. "There is no evidence that she is among the leading lights of American jurisprudence, or that she possesses talents commensurate with the Supreme Court's tasks," he wrote.

If 100 legal experts had each recommended 100 top candidates for the Supreme Court, Mr. Will added, "Miers's name probably would not have appeared in any of the 10,000 places on those lists."

Comment in our Forum!
More things that just piss me off

Powered by Blogger