Response To Donkeys vs Elephants Blog

My classmate's blog Donkey vs. Elephant has a post regarding homosexuals being unfit for parenthood. I feel I have no choice to disagree with this post. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion regarding homosexual marriage and child raising, but his or her reasoning about the effects on children is nothing more than an uneducated guess unless they have experienced it firsthand. Yes, one could guess that a child raised by a homosexual may have issues concerning a lack of either a maternal or paternal inlfuence.
However it is absolutely impossible to say what WILL happen to a child in those conditions. If proof is needed, then please allow me to present myself as such. My parents divorced when I was three years old for various reasons, one being that my father was not heterosexual. As a result, I was raised in what could be called a "homosexual household."
As I grew up, I was able to see the picture much more clearly. Still, I was raised with an indescribable love and was extremely protected, and I could never in my life say I was negatively affected. I am twenty-four years old and straight as an arrow. I play music, sports, read, draw, participate in my community, and judge absolutely noone's character on the basis of their sexual orientation. I am just fine.
Being fit for parenthood has nothing, I must repeat, NOTHING to do with sexual orientation. I consider myself one of the luckiest people in the world to have a life such as mine and to learn so much about the goodness in people. I can easily say that many people with straight parents, whether married or divorced, are raised in much more volatile homes than myself and others like me. So please, consider this in your opinion and be well.

Loose Change

“Loose change” is an 82 minute long internet documentary that presents the events of 9/11 as a conspiracy theory, claiming that the United States government planned and/or knew about the attacks that took place on September, 11th 2001 before they actually happened. “Loose Change “is written and directed by Dylan Avery, produced by Korey Rowe and researched by Jason Bermas. The film is told in narrative form while presenting still photos, expert testimonies, evidence and live coverage of the attacks.


I thought the film itself was presented pretty well. I did think the music was a bit inappropriate for such a tragic situation, but in my opinion the music is the least important factor in the film. The filmmakers were obviously new and inexperienced in the film department and the narrator's voice was a bit weak and annoying, but overall I think they did a good job in making the film. They obviously conducted an excessive amount of research and presented the country with the lingering questions and unknown facts of 9/11. They did not waste time, the film was very fast paced, which I think was intended only to provide information and keep the viewers attention. Although I did find a few errors in the film as far as research is concerned, maybe that is a good thing, so that people can look at this information on their own. Avery actually stated in a television interview that some of the errors were purposely left in the 2nd edition of the film to encourage people to do the research themselves.


While conducting much of my own research on the internet, I have found that many people agree with this film. Let me rephrase that statement, while conducting much of my own research on the internet, I have found that those who have taken the time and effort to do the research for themselves agree with this film. Although I have found a few disbelievers here and there who think the conspiracy theory of 9/11 is absolutely insane; those people have no reason for their decision. They also have no proof arguing against the theory.



In my opinion, “Loose Change” is a creditable film, the young filmmakers may be new to the business, but everybody starts off at the bottom, people can't just disregard this information because it was a film directed by Dylan Avery instead of Michael Moore. I honestly think that this is just the beginning of the “Loose Change Phenomenon”; people everywhere are beginning to ask more and more of the unanswered questions of 9/11. People from different cities all over the country are starting campaigns and eventually I think the world will have no choice but to discover the truth.


I am sure by now it is obvious that I am a believer of “Loose Change”, but let me briefly explain why. Although it would be impossible for me to cover every detail in this critique, I will do my best to cover what I find most interesting and important. Let's start with the phone calls from United Flight 93. As “Loose Change” argues in the film, the cell phone calls from the plane were nearly impossible to make. Most people argue that there was a chance that the cell phone calls were made, but do these people actually know the odds? Next, Flight attendant Betty Ong made a call lasting 23 minutes, but only 4 and a half minutes were recorded. The 9/11 commission said “ only the first 4 minutes of the call were recorded because of the time limit recently installed in the system” , but when asked what system and why, they would not respond. If there is nothing to hide, why can't they answer simple question?



Another important question, what really happened to United Flight 93? Well, this is where “Loose Change” made a really big error. In “Loose Change 1st Edition”, the information suggested that United Flight 93 was shot down, but then in the 2nd edition they changed their story, suggesting that United Flight 93 landed at Cleveland Hopkins airport and basically the passengers disappeared into thin air. They should have stuck with the information in the 1st edition for this topic because all evidence points that way. According to http://www.911research.com/, there are several pieces of evidence that Flight 93 was shot down, such as; Debris fields up to 8 miles from the primary crash site, strange sounds from the jetliner before it nose dived, an apparent attempt to cover up details of the crash by changing the official time of the crash from 10:06pm to 10:03pm and eye witnesses who saw military planes. “Loose change” also implies that no bodies were found, the film shows testimony from the on site coroner, “I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood, not a drop”, but the Washington Post reported that 1500 human remains were recovered at Flight 93's crash site and the coroner only spent 20 minutes at the crash site before it was evacuated. So, here you see, “Loose Change” does in fact have errors, but that does not mean it is completely falsified. In my opinion, when making a documentary as complicated as this one, errors are bound to be made.


Unfortunately there is not enough time for me to go into details about the demolition of the World trade centers 1, 2 and 7, flight 77 hitting the pentagon leaving no trace, the case of the missing black boxes, the waiver that needed to be signed by the 9/11 family members before any information could be released to them, the American hospital that treated Osama Bin Laden when he was wanted by United States Officials, or any of the other conspiracy events of 9/11. “Loose Change” provides a general break down of these events, presenting hard core evidence to the hash truth of 9/11. The bottom line - “Loose Change” has opened the eyes of people all over the country including me and even those who do not believe have those lingering questions running through their minds. I know it's hard to believe George Bush could be a part of something so intelligent, but with a little help we all have our moments. Evidence is evidence, no matter how tragic, unbelievable or scary it may be. My advice for the disbelievers, go do the research, I mean really dig in and look for the facts, and then tell me you don't believe it.

The American Dream's "Hypocrisy"

My classmate's blog American Dream makes some brilliant points concerning the nation's vast ignorance. I completely agree and believe our ignorance is the one obstacle which has prevented our society from being even remotely close to an age of enlightenment, which is something I feel we are long overdue for.

I believe that mass ignorance is a control system implemented by those in power in order to indeed keep society from reaching a state of peace and enlightenment. I see, hear, smell, taste, and feel how my surroundings are attempting to poison my intuition and compromise my judgment.

On tv, I see people my age on reality shows binge drinking, fighting, and fornicating suggesting that it's a common and acceptable standard of living. On the radio, I hear both rockers and rappers singing about the exact same things mentioned above. It's almost inescapable.

Ignorance is being pushed onto society, especially towards my age group, the young American. What kills me is how so few actually push back. An intellectual revolution is necessary. However, who would be capable of manifesting such a movement? The President? The Church? Aliens? I'd put my money on aliens.

HAARP- This Is No Musical Instrument Here

The High-Frequency Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) based in Gokoma Alaska-jointly managed by the US Air Force and the US Navy-is part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air Force Research Laboratory's Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of powerful antennas capable of creating "controlled local modifications of the ionosphere".
Scientist Dr. Nicholas Begich-actively involved in the public campaign against HAARP-describes HAARP as: "A super-powerful radiowave-beaming technology that lifts areas of the ionosphere (upper layer of the atmosphere) by focusing a beam and heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto earth and penetrate everything-living and dead."
Dr. Rosalie Bertell depicts HAARP as "a gigantic heater that can cause major disruption in the ionosphere, creating not just holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly radiation from bombarding the planet."
The important debate on global warming under UN auspices provides but a partial picture of climate change; in addition to the devastating impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the ozone layer, the World's climate can now bemodified as part of a new generation of sophisticated "non-lethal weapons." Both the Americans and the Russians have developed capabilities to manipulate the World's climate.
In the US, the technology is being perfected under the High-frequency Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) as part of the ("Star Wars") Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). Recent scientific evidence suggests that HAARP is fully operational and has the ability of potentially triggering floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes.
From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction. Potentially, it constitutes an instrument of conquest capable of selectively destabilising agricultural and ecological systems of entire regions.
While there is no evidence that this deadly technology has been used, surely the United Nations should be addressing the issue of "environmental warfare" alongside the debate on the climatic impacts of greenhouse gases. Despite a vast body of scientific knowledge, the issue of deliberate climatic manipulations for military use has never been explicitly part of the UN agenda on climate change. Neither the official delegations nor the environmental action groups participating in the Hague Conference on Climate Change (CO6) (November 2000) have raised the broad issue of "weather warfare" or "environmental modification techniques (ENMOD)" as relevant to an understanding of climate change.
The clash between official negotiators, environmentalists and American business lobbies has centered on Washington's outright refusal to abide by commitments on carbon dioxide reduction targets under the 1997 Kyoto protocol. The impacts of military technologies on the World's climate are not an object of discussion or concern. Narrowly confined to greenhouse gases, the ongoing debate on climate change serves Washington's strategic and defense objectives.
For more information, go here.

Joe The Plumber?

A post by David Neiwert from the left leaning blog site Crooks and Liars commented on Joe The Plumber. For those who are not in the know, this guy is your All-American Joe Six-Pack who had the guts to challenge Obama's tax policies in front of dozens of onlookers along with national news camera crews. At first glance, Joe just seems like a middle-age, middle-class small business owner who disapproves of Obama wanting to impose higher taxes on those who make more than enough money for themselves. This post was created to raise questions about who this fellow actually is and who he actually is working for. It turns out that evidence provided by Martin Eisenstadt, active political blogger and enthusiast, claims that Joe The Plummer is actually Joe Wurzelbacher, close relative to Robert Wurzelbacher, who is son-in-law to Charles Keating. McCain has a very personal relationship with the Keating family. In the 1980's, McCain was submerged in scandal as one of the "Keating Five," congressmen investigated on ethics charges for strenuously helping convicted racketeer Charles Keating after he gave them large campaign contributions and vacation trips. Keating is still known as a dedicated McCain campaign donator. With this lengthy chain of relations, it's very easy to believe that Joe The Plummer, a named dropped by McCain in the last debate, is nothing more than a minion of the faceless figures behind the curtain driven to shut Obama down at all cost.

Dick Cheney, Role Model?

In a New York Times editorial, an anonymous writer explores Republican Vice Presidential Nominee Sarah Palin's sentiments towards our nation's current V.P. Dick Cheney. This editorial is aimed towards anyone such as myself who rightfully questions Palin's legitimacy as a Vice Presidential Candidiate. During the V.P. Debate aired this past week, Palin was asked to describe the Vice President's role in government. She supported Cheney's views suggesting that the Constitution allows a lot of flexibility in the Vice Presidency and expressed her thanks towards the document for providing that. The author raises a great question asking if Palin has any idea of the lengths that Bush and Cheney went to in order to allow the V.P. to trample all over the Constitution. A clear piece of evidence suggesting how clueless she is was broadcast during an interview between Palin and reporter Katie Couric. Couric asked Palin to describe the best and worst aspects of Cheney's time in office. Attempting to dodge the real issue, Palin joked about Cheney's hunting accident then went on to say that he expressed great support for our troops. The author provides more evidence and logic suggesting that Palin either does not know, or refuses to believe that Cheney mislead Americans about weapons of mass destruction, set up illegal detainment prisons where captives were tortured, enforced wire tapping, and created an energy policy favoring the oil industry that made him rich. The author then described Ms. Couric's interview with Democratic V.P. Nominee Joseph Biden. When asked the same question as Palin, Biden let loose by saying Mr. Cheney’s theory of the “unitary executive” held that “Congress and the people have no power in a time of war." During the debate, Biden also described Cheney as the “the most dangerous vice president we’ve had in American history.” More logical evidence is presented by the author explaining that the Constitution does not imply any sort of flexibility in the Vice Presidency. It gives the vice president no legislative responsibilities other than casting a tie-breaking vote in the Senate when needed and no executive powers at all. The vice president’s constitutional role is to be ready to serve if the president dies or becomes incapacitated. The editorial ends with the line: So far, Ms. Palin has it exactly, frighteningly wrong. I agree one hundred percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/opinion/04sat1.html

Should Foreign Political Knowledge Be Required For the Presidency? I think so!

The political blog site Americablog posted a disturbing example of the lack of foreign, along with basic geographic awareness displayed by Republican Presidential Candidate John McCain. Originally aired on CNN, the blog site shows the news clip airing coverage of a radio interview between McCain and a reporter for Caracol 1260, a Latin American news radio station. When asked if he'd be willing to hold a White House meeting with Spain's Priminster Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, McCain was belittled to vague, mumbling answers suggesting that he had know clue of who this man even was. Spain happens to be a NATO ally. Is it too much to ask that whoever may be running for office have knowledge of foreign leaders or at least their geographic location? McCain explained that he's more than willing to cooperate with Latin American leaders who share the same values as he does. That's great to hear, but the question was in regards to a European leader! The one and only question McCain was asked was regarding the possibility of meeting Spain's Prime Minister and his numerous replies still never answered. The annoyingly repetitive "willingness to meet depending on politcal priorites" answer distinctly reminded me of a scene from Ferris Bueller's Day Off when Principle Rooney is at Bueller's front door intercom. Rooney is furiously asking questions only to be answered by the pre-recorded voice of Bueller stating that he is unable to answer to door due to his weakened condition. To see the real-life, but sadder adaptation, here is the link:
http://www.AMERICAblog.com