RUTHFULLY YOURS

So How Many Penguins Are There? The population of one breed of the flightless bird has soared.

Global-warming alarmists are denying scientific evidence indicating that penguin populations are healthy and growing.

Researchers recently attempted to count all of the Adélie penguins in Antarctica and found, to their own surprise, that the numbers of this white-eyed breed are exploding on the frigid continent, according to the Wall Street Journal. This contradicts claims by activists that the flightless bird is a victim of global warming whose dwindling numbers can be directly linked to dwindling ice caps. Wildlife biologists closely monitor Adélie penguins because their status correlates with annual sea-ice conditions and temperature trends.

But the Adélie population is actually 53 percent larger than previously estimated, having increased globally by 29 percent in two decades.

Heather Lynch of Stony Brook University, in New York, and imaging specialist Michelle LaRue of the University of Minnesota counted the birds by satellite and found that the Adélie penguin population is now 3.79 million breeding pairs, with 251 colonies.

The survey, published online this week by the American Ornithologists’ Union, coincides with another satellite census of Emperor penguins conducted in 2012 by geographers at the British Antarctic Survey that happened upon twice as many Emperor penguins as scientists had previously thought existed.

A recent article from Reuters.com reported findings from a study predicting that global warming would reduce Antarctica’s Emperor penguin population from 600,000 to around 480,000 by 2100. Governments have been reluctant to list the birds as endangered, however, because populations in 45 known colonies are supposed to rise until 2050 before declining. Emperors are one of three species considered stable, and of the 18 penguin species, only King, Adélie, and Chinstrap penguins are said to be increasing.

That is, unless the one talking is Ron Naveen, founder of the scientific research organization Oceanites, who told ABCnews.com, “We know two of the three penguin species in the peninsula, Chinstrap and Adélie, are declining significantly in a region where, in the last 60 years, it’s warmed by five degrees Fahrenheit annually and by nine degrees Fahrenheit in winter.” This organization found that it is actually the Gentoo species that is increasing.

See the movie “Gifted Hands” about Dr. Carson and his incredible achievements in medicine and surgery….rsk
A Curious Mind The acquisition of knowledge is the antidote to the herd mentality of the agenda-driven media.

I recently returned home after two weeks of engagements in New Zealand and Australia focusing on empowerment through reading. The Kiwis and Aussies are not very different from Americans, even though they inhabit the opposite side of the globe.

I was struck by the way many people perceived the political atmosphere in the United States. Although the well-educated individuals who have access to all of the American cable channels tend to be well informed on the issues, most people had only heard that America has finally repaired its broken medical system with the advent of Obamacare and now everyone, including the indigent, has excellent health care. They were under the impression that most Americans are very happy with Obamacare and with their wonderful president, who had ushered in a great new day in America with his brilliance in many areas.

Many people were shocked when I relayed the facts about the deleterious effects of Obamacare on employment, skyrocketing insurance premiums, and the displacement of health-care providers. Furthermore, they had little knowledge about Benghazi, the Internal Revenue Service scandal, the Veterans Affairs debacle, or the depth of our financial woes. In other words, they were just like a multitude of Americans who pay little attention to their news sources and are not curious enough to seek multiple sources and arm themselves with enough historical knowledge to be able to decipher truth from fiction.

Fortunately, I found that most of the people Down Under are not nearly as dogmatic in their beliefs as Americans have become. Our people on either side of the political spectrum tend to be more close-minded, partaking only of news sources that align with their ideological beliefs and in many cases engaging in the demonization of other information sources. This, of course, leads to intolerance and ignorance, which are associated with a whole cadre of societal problems. Frequently, that narrow-mindedness is encouraged by hyper-partisan individuals who actually call out news outlets such as the Fox News Channel for ridicule.

Such people might do well to ask themselves what would become of our country if people heard only what the government wanted them to hear. If they could be honest with themselves, I think they would have to admit that they would be uncomfortable in that setting. The mainstream media could provide a great service to the American people, as well as people around the world, by embracing their duty to be objective investigators and reporters of the news. I realize the likelihood of that occurring is small, but hope springs eternal.

The Palestinian ‘Genocide’ Lie It’s a moral scandal that it’s even necessary to debunk equating Israel with the Nazis.

‘Here’s the difference between us,” Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained on Fox News Sunday. “We’re using missile defense to protect our civilians, and they’re using their civilians to protect their missiles.”

It’s a classic talking point. It’s also objectively true, and that truth is very frustrating for Israel’s critics.

All one needs to do is delve into the muck of Twitter and read the timelines for such hashtags as #GazaUnderAttack and #GenocideInGaza: “They’re killing the women and children to ensure there won’t be a new generation of Palestine.” “One Holocaust can NEVER justify another.”

And let’s not even talk about the globally trending hashtag #HitlerWasRight.

Of course, it’s not just on Twitter. Mahmoud Abbas, the head of the feckless Palestinian Authority, recently condemned Israel for committing “genocide” in Gaza. For decades, political cartoonists and cartoonish politicians have been jaw-jawing about how Israel now wears the SS uniform.

This too is basically a talking point — and a very old one. But this one is plainly a lie.

If the Israelis are, or have ever been, interested in genocide, they are utterly incompetent at it. As slanders go, it’s almost funny, like the old paranoid delusion that George W. Bush was simultaneously an idiot and a criminal mastermind.

On the one hand, the Israeli military is supposed to be ruthlessly competent and determined to wipe out the Palestinians. On the other, the Palestinian population has grown more than 100 percent since 1970. The population in the Gaza Strip has grown nearly threefold since 1990. The Palestinians themselves expect the population to double over the next two decades. “Genocide” is a loaded political term, but under any remotely reasonable definition, shouldn’t those numbers be going the other way?

It’s just a hunch, but if the Israelis wanted to wipe out as many Palestinians as possible, never mind commit genocide, they probably wouldn’t issue warnings to Gazans (by phone and leaflet) to get out of harm’s way. Nor would Israel continue to allow hundreds of trucks of food and medical aid to enter Gaza even as hundreds of rockets leave Gaza.

Things are more expensive than government statistics say they should be.

A lot of people who watched Rick Santelli blow up on CNBC the other day thought the same thing: “That guy needs a vacation — and so do I. The world just doesn’t make sense to him, or maybe me, either.” So you head up to the cabin. Maybe it’s the same cabin you rented back in 2000, before your kids. You just want a quiet reality check, a chance to think it all through. You swear you’ll turn off your phone. You and your family need time to remind yourselves how good you have it.

But there’s one nuisance that can interrupt your seven-day idyll just as surely as a blackfly or a mosquito. That nuisance is the price zap.

The first zap comes even before you get in the car. Your daughter wants a haircut so she can feel the sun on her neck. Great. But then she reports she needs $45 for the cut. What? A haircut used to be $20. You fork out, hiding your irritation. You expected haircuts to be high, but not this high.

The next zap comes on the road. A gallon of gas is $4.00, when it was $1.30 back in 2000. You expected gas to be high. But not this high.

The cottage you rented is nice, but the rent is more than you expected. It’s hot in the cabin, and your other daughter wants to see The Fault in Our Stars one more time. So you head over to the theater. The ticket is $10.00, not $5.00, like it was when you went to see Gladiator back in 2000. Your spouse asks you to pick up some coffee. A pound is $5.20, not $3.40, like back in the old days. You expected movies and coffee to be high, but not this high.

As business owners, we should look upon competition as the tonic that increases our strength. The threat of competitive destruction is one reason we work harder and smarter. As members of society and as consumers, we benefit from the good things competition brings – lower prices and better products or services.

On the other hand, when businesses become monopolistic, consumers suffer. Monopolies, which may be efficient and are sometimes government granted, tend to hurt consumers, as they exclusively have the ability to control price and service. Definitionally, they reflect the absence of free markets. And, of course, when they don’t operate under a government license, they violate the Sherman Antitrust Act. The debate about Amazon, especially in its role as the dominant book retailer, incorporates all of these issues. Is it or is it not predatory and monopolistic? Or is it a good business that is destructive to existing retailers, but positive for consumers?

Disruption is painful for existing businesses, as many of us know from personal experience and as can be read in stories like The Magnificent Ambersons (or seen in the Orson Welles movie of the same name). Booth Tarkington’s novel relates the story of an Indiana family whose fortune was tied to 19th Century carriages at a time when the automobile was proving to be the 20th Century’s greatest invention. Dynamism in business is healthy. Family fortunes have risen and fallen throughout history, and they will continue to do so.

Amazon’s war with Hachette is what prompted these musings. Hachette, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lagardère Group (the world’s third largest book publisher), is in a dispute with Amazon over the disposition of e-book sales. While specifics in this case have not been disclosed, the consensus suggests that under the current contract the publisher retains 70% of all sales and the retailer 30%. Typically, the author gets 25%, which comes from the publisher’s share. The sense of most observers is that in negotiating a new contract Amazon wants to split revenues from e-book sales 50-50 with the publisher – with the publisher continuing to pay the author from its share.

Hachette is not a small company. As mentioned, it is a wholly owned subsidiary of Lagardère, France’s largest production company, with 2013 revenues of €7.2 billion ($9.8 billion). Nevertheless, it is not in the same league as Amazon, which had sales last year of $74.5 billion.

Negotiations over a new contract have been going on for some time, with Amazon, which sells 65% of all online new book units, print and digital, pressuring authors by delaying the release date of their books. (As an aside, and as a minuscule example, I have been “victimized” by Amazon, as they seemingly have delayed availability of my book, One Man’s Family; though, in this case, my brother, the owner of the Toadstool, is a beneficiary. Also, I do not own stock in Amazon.)

THE MANCHINS FATHER AND DAUGHTER HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN CONTROVERSIES BEFORE:

2007: The Heather Bresch E.M.B.A. controversy refers to a controversy regarding the granting of an Executive MBA by West Virginia University to Mylan Chief operating officer Heather Bresch. An independent panel concluded that Bresch did not complete the graduation requirements. West Virginia University’s president, provost and business school dean resigned as a result of the investigation, and the university’s general counsel and the president’s communications officer relinquished those roles.

2014: Zohydro Ban Proposed by Senator Joe Manchin: His Daughter is CEO of Competitor?

http://johnsaddiction.com/7626-joe-machin-zohydro-oxycontin/

US taxation of corporate profits is the highest in the world, and hobbles American companies competing on world markets, thereby costing American jobs. Just last month, medical equipment giant Medtronic announced plans to move its headquarters from Minneapolis to Dublin, via the acquisition of a company located there, and taking the new company’s domicile as its own. Now, it is being followed by a company run by the daughter of a US senator. Andrew Ross Sorkin of The New York Times:

Heather Bresch grew up around politics. Her father is Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia and a former governor. She has heard him say repeatedly, “We live in the greatest country on Earth,” as he did in countless political advertisements. And it appeared to rub off on her: Ms. Bresch was named a “Patriot of the Year” in 2011 by Esquire magazine for helping to push through the F.D.A. Safety Innovation Act.

Ms. Bresch is the chief executive of Mylan, the giant maker of generic drugs.

Until now, Ms. Bresch ran an unabashedly proud American company based in a Pittsburgh-area suburb, one of a handful of success stories that kept the once-thriving steel city relevant.

But on Monday, Ms. Bresch announced plans to renounce her company’s United States citizenship and instead become a company incorporated in the Netherlands, where the tax rates are lower. She did so by agreeing to acquire Abbott Laboratories’ European generic drug business.

In preparing next term’s calendar for my classes, I use the At-A-Glance PM3-28 over-sized item. Sprinkled throughout the calendar are Christian, Jewish, and Muslim holidays, information about daylight savings, and the like.

Apparently since at least 2012 (if not before) the calendar manufacturer saw fit to note The Day of the Race on Sunday October 12, 2014 as well as Revolution Day on November 17, 2014. Next to the name of the holiday there is an (M).

Curious, I went to investigate these two holidays which I had never paid much attention to, only to learn that these two dates are anything but benign commemorations.

The Day of the Race refers to a “Mexican national holiday known as Dia de la Raza. This date is honored in other countries as Columbus Day and under other names; but the event it commemorates and the way in which it is observed have become quite controversial.”

Though the date that Columbus arrived in the Americas is celebrated in many Latin American countries, there has been a decidedly negative cast to the celebration in recent years. In 2002 in Venezuela the name was changed to the Dia de la Resistencia Indigena (Day of Indigenous Resistance). Thus, “originally conceived of as a celebration of Hispanic influence in the Americas… it has come to be seen by some in Latin America as a counter to Columbus Day; a celebration of the resistance against the arrival of Europeans in the Americas and of the native races and culture.”

Beginning in the 1960s, Dia de la Raza “has served as a time of mobilization for pan-ethnic Latino activists.” In fact, “La Raza has served as a periodic rallying cry for Hispanic activists” with the first Hispanic March on Washington occurring on Columbus Day in 1996. Additionally, the largest Hispanic social justice organization is called the National Council of La Raza (NCLR).

* Norman A. Bailey, Ph.D. is Professor of Economic Statecraft, The Institute of World Politics, Washington, D.C., and Professor of Economic Statecraft at the Center for the Study of National Security, University of Haifa, Israel. He was Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan for National Security Affairs and Director of International Economic Affairs, National Security Council, 1981-1984.

The prevention of the proliferation of nuclear weapons, particularly in the case of rogue countries such as North Korea and Iran, is a goal universally accepted by the international community. There is no such unanimity as to what to do to prevent it. Diplomatic pressure, economic measures, and military action are all in the menu of possibilities.

In the case of North Korea, all measures adopted were unsuccessful, and North Korea has constructed a full-fledged nuclear arsenal, which (along with increased Chinese assertion of various degrees of control over most of the East China and South China Seas), has resulted in increased military buildups in Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, the Philippines and elsewhere. Why did the imposition of an extensive regime of economic sanctions, punctuated by periods of economic aid to North Korea in times of famine, fail to prevent its development of nuclear weapons capacity? Quite simply because the sanctions were never adopted universally or applied effectively, especially by China, which provided North Korea with the energy and food supplies needed to maintain a minimum level of societal functionality.

The case of Iran is different. North Korea is devoid of natural resources and of a private sector, and its industrial, scientific and technological development have been stunted by the world’s most repressive totalitarian regime, which aside from Chinese assistance sustains itself through such activities as smuggling, counterfeiting and money-laundering. Iran, in contrast, is a resource-rich country with a well-developed economic infrastructure and a well-educated population, as well as a private sector of some significance. Trade sanctions were first applied and then supplemented by financial sanctions. Both were relatively well enforced, although sales of crude oil continued at a much lower level than historically through continued though reduced sales to South Korea, China and India.

Despite the manifest success of the Iranian sanctions regime, in November of 2013 the six powers (5+1) negotiations with Iran, based on secret contacts with the Iranians by the U.S. preceding the formal meetings, resulted in an agreement signed by the six powers and Iran on November 22

significantly relaxing the sanctions in return for little more than promises on the part of the Iranians. In perfectly predictable fashion, the sanctions regime proceeded to crumble, as countries and private companies from around the world rushed in to take advantage of trade and investment opportunities. Whatever happens in the formal negotiations, the Iran sanctions are effectively dead.

Expressions of sympathy to Gazans, for having their Ramadan celebrations foiled by Israeli retaliations, highlight prevailing ignorance of Islamic values, not only on the part of the American media.

On July 9, in his “Ramadan Message,” President Barack Obama, once again, equated the the Islamic principles of Ramadan with American values: “I…know that Ramadan is a time of intense devotion and reflection…reciting and listening to the entire Koran over the course of the month. These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings,” he said.

Yet, the Koran and prayers recited by Muslims, are reminders to follow in the footsteps of the Prophet Mohammad, who we all know had nothing in common with our Founding Fathers or Abraham Lincoln.

Canadian Imam Ahmed Shehab, who was linked to at least two of the 9/11 hijackers, set the record straight. Writing in Al Ayam, an Arabic bi-weekly newspaper (Issue 8, June 30, 2014, P. 10), translated by Jonathan D. Halevi, he reminded his Muslim readers of the true meaning of Ramadan:

“The [Prophet], peace and blessing be upon him, used to carry out the jihad during the [month of] Ramadan and to order his companions to strengthen themselves for encountering their enemy….”

“The [Prophet] … was the greatest of the mujahideen. Fasting did not stop him from taking part in invasions. He took part in six invasions during nine years; all of them occurred during the [month of] Ramadan. He committed formidable deeds during the [month of] Ramadan such as destroying al-Darrar Mosque [built by the hypocrites], smashing the famous statues of the Arabs, meeting with delegations, marrying the mother of the believers Hafsah and conquering Mecca during the [month of] Ramadan.

It’s like the old joke: Why do Jewish men die before their wives? Because they want to. Civilizations for the most part die because they no longer want to live. That is the nub of my 2011 book How Civilizations Die (and Why Islam Is Dying, Too). They cease to believe in their own future and distract themselves from the prospect of extinction as best they can. Hellenistic Greece was the first universal demographic disaster; it gave us prototypes of the steam engine and the computer (via Hero of Alexandria) as well as the modern literary forms. But even wealthy men exposed their daughters and the population imploded. When Aristotle taught that men naturally seek the good, the overwhelming preponderance of evidence had already turned against him. Most men seek nothingness. Soon the last surviving remnants of the classical world will disappear. In another generation, more people will speak Hebrew than Greek.

Hamas wants to die, obviously and visibly. That thought horrifies Westerners. As a number of Israeli commentators observe, Hamas doesn’t particularly care about having a Palestinian State. It wants to destroy the Jewish State and is willing to die in the process. It wants to die in such a way that Israel will die, too. There is something utterly surreal to Hamas crowding civilians around military targets, and Israeli pilots declining to attack them. It recalls joke about the sadist and the masochist. The masochist says, “Beat me!,” and the sadist says, No…suffer.”

Hamas, to be sure, proposes to die in an accelerated time frame and a particularly disgusting fashion, but it should be kept in mind that self-willed extinction is the norm. West of the Indus, Israel is the only survivor among the thousands of little nations that flourished between 10,000 B.C.E. and 600 C.E. To be sure, there have been plenty of small tribes that wanted to live but were trampled by conquering hordes. The rule, however, is that civilizations die of their own disgust with life. Most of the industrial nations are dying, some very quickly. Most of the Muslim world would rather die than accommodate modernity (although some of it may choose to cease to be Islamic).

I do not mean to sound cruel, but the best thing you can do for victims of a dying culture is: Don’t be one of them. Individuals who want to live have the option of changing cultures. I do not mean that Israel (or anyone else) should go about killing off enemies in order to satisfy their death wish. God forbid: life is still sacred to us even if it is repugnant to them. Neither do we have to commit suicide in order to accommodate our crazy neighbor’s death-wish. We might try to talk him down from the roof, but we are entitled to step aside when he jumps. It is not in our power to persuade suicidal civilizations to carry on living. Ultimately it is our job to contain the damage to ourselves. We cannot help but accept some civilian deaths while engaging an enemy that seeks the maximum number of civilian casualties.