Is Schapelle Corby a Victim of Circumstance?

The FBI announced today that they have arrested 18 people in a drug smuggling operation that operated out of JFK airport. During the 2 year investigation, the feds seized 90 pounds of cocaine and 50 pounds of heroin. The drugs were smuggled by airport personnel by placing packages of drugs in passenger's baggage (after security screening) at one airport then removing them at another airport, then returning the bags to the passenger.

This should send shivers down every flyer's spine. What would happen if a package was not picked up for some unforeseen reason? What if you were caught with a few pounds of heroin in your baggage? Would you use the "I have no idea how that got in there!!" line? Do you think anyone would really believe you?

It didn't work for Schapelle Corby who is now serving a 20 year sentence in an Indonesian prison for smuggling 9 lbs of marijuana in her unlocked luggage. Corby has long maintained that she didn't know how the drugs go in there and there's some evidence that she's telling the truth. Even circumstantially, it's hard to fathom he improbability of someone, on a family vacation, smuggling 9 lbs of marijuana into an Muslim country that is well known for its harsh drug laws.

In the United States, the federal government needs to crack down hard on this type of smuggling. IMHO, if an airline/airport employee is caught smuggling ANYTHING in passenger luggage, they deserve life in prison. Not so much for the relatively minor issue of drugs, but the huge potential for terrorism. How closely are they checking the "box of cocaine" to make sure that's what it really is? How much would it take to bribe them to take on a box of unknown origin?

The airline security breach in this case is massive and frightening. And you just know it's still happening somewhere.

The Republican Party: Invasion Of The Body Snatchers?

I've watched most of the Republican debates over the last few weeks and I am just about as confused as the RNC must be right now. Which of these guys is actually a Republican? Or more accurately, "How did all these Democratic candidates get into the Republican debates?" A story in the Politico suggests that Sen. John McCain and Rudy Giuliani are the best ticket for the Repubs. Wow. That would be a "good" ticket?. First of all, I am still somewhat astounded that a RINO like Rudy Giuliani is the leader of the pack, considering that he is pro-abortion (favors taxpayer funded abortions no less), is for same-sex unions, and is anti-gun. Overall, he's looks to be somewhat to the left of Hilary Clinton. Am I missing something here? Which "Republicans" are the pollsters calling anyway?

Will Iraq be the big issue in 2008? Survey says:....Yes...well, maybe

A recent Rasmussen poll says that 68% of Americans want to be out of Iraq within a year. Yet all the front runners, both Democrat and Republican, want to be more into Iraq. Hillary and Giuliani are the exact same type of war hawks as Bush, with both of them mirroring his current policies with regard to Iran in their campaign rhetoric. Only three candidates, Ron Paul, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich are suggesting that the whole thing was a huge mistake. And all of them are polling in the single digits.

And how is Giuliani polling so high anyway? The whole thing begs the question that was brought up in the 2004 election. How big an effect are cell phone-only households having on telephone polling. In 2004 the alarm was sounded over the rise of cell phone only households. This caused great consternation for the pollsters as federal law prohibits automated dialing of cell phone numbers (used almost exclusively in telephone polls). In 2004, the error introduced by these people was non-existent: Polls matched actual results. However back then, cell only households made up just 3% of all households. Today 13% of all adults are using only a cell phone or VOIP. More importantly, 33% of 18-29 year olds only have a cell phone. None of these people are being polled. That's a huge concern, specifically for pollsters trying to gauge issues that revolve around a particular age group (elections anyone?). Those opinions might now show up in a telephone poll, but may at the ballot box. In June 2007, the Pew Research Center wrote:

The picture is not entirely positive, however. While the cell-only problem is currently not biasing polls based on the entire population, it may very well be damaging estimates for certain subgroups in which the use of only a cell phone is more common. This concern is particularly relevant for young adults. According to the most recent government estimate, more than 25% of those under age 30 use only a cell phone.

This might help to explain Ron Paul's huge internet support, near total dominance in Republican straw polls, but weak telephone polling. Interestingly enough, Paul has also done very well on text message polls, which would favor a younger more technically savvy audience.

When Does A Horrific Wrong Instantly Become A "eh...it wasn't that bad, really"?

*When you find out your friends did the 'wrong'.

Administrators at The George Washington University, promising expulsion for students who distributed xenophobic posters, suddenly get cold feet when they realize the guilty party wasn't the conservative group they thought it was

On Monday of this week, anti-Islamic posters distributed on The George Washington University campus (complete with university seal and forged signature of a conservative student group) were called hate speech. Today, after the revelation that 7 student members of the liberal Students for Conservativo-Facism Awareness group made and distributed the posters in a smear campaign, the fliers have been downgraded to mere "controversial posters". This, after GW Administrators had initially attacked the conservative Young America's Foundation group and demanded they sign an agreement disavowing any hate speech that might occur at their event (which was the subject of the poster smear tactic). I guess the GW administration had found their criminal and wanted a signed confession.

Now the world waits with bated breath on their very uncomfortable and public response. What's a slap on the wrist between friends?

Scenes From The Upcoming Police State

Wow. This really creeped me out. Someone has developed (and you've no doubt financed) some seriously Orwellian toys to keep track of you. If you haven't seen the movie Brazil yet, I highly recommend it. It looks like it's our future.

Global Hysteria Swarms the Globe Like A Heat Wave

The global warming debate is becoming so hysterical I can barely stand it. An October heat wave is pushing through the mid-Atlantic states causing the Weather channel to call it "Wild Weather". The Drudge Report is calling it "Heatwave in the Heartland". Below that story is a not-so-subtilly placed story about fashion designers having a hard time because "...there is no strong difference between summer and winter any more". Yeah, ok. You go ahead and wear your shorts in February, Beppe.

A quick check of Accuweather shows that the historical high temp for October in Washington, D.C. was 96 degrees in 1941. OMG! Global warming must have started back in at least the 1940's!

My point is that it's been crazy hot before and that can't be blamed on global warming without claiming that global warming began before the huge carbon release of the 1950's.

Additionally, why hasn't anyone pointed the finger at this guy?

Image Courtesy of SOHO (ESA & NASA)

Now, admittedly, I haven't really been keeping up on this issue and maybe some rigorous science has ruled it out. But our Sun has a history of causing global warming and cooling. All without our help. It would seem like good investigative work to rule out the cause of the Earth's last couple of the global climate changes, wouldn't it? Perhaps it's too terrifying to contemplate a global crisis that is unfazed by UN resolutions and business meetings.

There are plenty of reason to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, not the least of which is national security and clean air. However I would hate for scientific principals to be discarded in the race to a 'good end'.

Hypocrites at the Washington Post call out Virginia candidate

I had to laugh when I saw this article in the Washington Post, in which the Post 'outs' a candidate running for the position of Chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors. The Post has uncovered that the Republican candidate (Gary H. Baise) took "nearly $300,000" in subsidies for an Illinois farm over the last 10 years. All of this was completely legal mind you. It's just that the Post felt there was something inherently shameful with a wealthy individual taking a government subsidy.

So what's funny about that? Well, for starters, I'd bet a large chunk of the wealthy Washington Post elite are taking somewhere between $6,000-$10,000 in government subsidies every single year as well. This subsidy is in the form of the mortgage interest deduction. Sorry but it's true - mortgage interest deduction will be a $100 billion tax-payer funded subsidy by 2009. And not only that, but it's a subsidy that disproportionally benefits the rich over the poor. Year 2003 IRS data shows that taxpayers who had an adjusted gross income (AGI) of less than $30,000 received only 9% of the interest deduction subsidy, in spite of filing more than 52% of all tax returns. Yet those having more than $100,000 in AGI claimed 36% of the money. In fact, those making more than $75,000 in AGI claimed more than half of all mortgage interest deductions.

In 2004, the government handed out $89,500,000,000 in mortgage subsidies. 53% of that money (over $48,000,000,000) went to the 11.8% of taxpayers with AGIs over $100,000. And more than 20% of the money (~$18,400,000,000) went to the 2.3% of tax filers with AGIs over $200,000. Some of those people no doubt live in what would typically be called 'mansions'.

Ending this subsidy of course, is not popular. That's because so many benefit from it. But keep that in mind next April 15th. Do you really need that deduction? I'm sure everyone at the Washington Post will keep their pristine hands out of the cookie jar [/sarcasm]

For more info see HERE

Nobel prize winner calls for a halt to water fluoridation

Nobel prize winner Arvid Carlsson (awarded the prize for research into Parkinson's disease) along with about 600 other medical and science professionals calls for the halting of water fluoridation. Looks like the debate is heating up again:

Read/watch the story by clicking here

Professionals sign Fluoride Action Network call to end water fluoridation

Nobel Laureate Dr. Arvid Carlsson, one of 600 signers

American Dental Association guidance on infant formula

Former EPA scientist Bob Carton analyzes National Academy of Sciences report

Centers for Disease Control study cites statistics on fluorosis in children

National Academy of Sciences executive summary, Fluoride in Water

CRS Report for Congress: Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Review of Fluoridation and Regulation Issues