sleeping on the wheel

was waiting it to go higher when bad news announced, but did not. can short now?

Put Options Expiring Friday, March 18, 2011
Symbol Last Change Bid Ask Volume Open Int
30.00 GMCR110319P00030000 4.80 Up 0.60 4.40 4.50 10 2,328
call
GMCR110319C00030000 4.40 Down 0.10 4.25 4.50 72 387 30.00

Put Options Expiring Friday, January 21, 2011
Symbol Last Change Bid Ask Volume Open Int
30.00 GMCR1110122P00030000 0.25 0.00 0.07 0.19 22 67
call
GMCR1110122C00030000 139.10 0.00 102.85 105.70 22 23 30.00



izit to early to short? wait an uptick or a rebound
Put Options Expiring Friday, May 20, 2011
Symbol Last Change Bid Ask Volume Open Int
40.00 APOL110521P00040000 6.85 Down 0.20 7.20 7.45 100 121
call
APOL110521C00040000 3.85 Down 0.30 3.80 4.00 38 233 40.00

Put Options Expiring Friday, February 18, 2011
Symbol Last Change Bid Ask Volume Open Int
37.00 APOL110219P00037000 4.50 0.00 4.45 4.60 30 175
call
APOL110219C00037000 3.85 Down 0.53 4.00 4.15 131 11 37.00

Father Driven To Pick Through His Son’s Remains (Just imagine the horror)

he Burn Pit (American Legion) ^ | 20 Sept 2010 | Mike Warner AOCS, USN Ret.

Posted on Wednesday, September 22, 2010 9:32:33 AM by OCCASparky

On September 15, 2010 at around 0800 in the morning, a family makes their way into Arlington National Cemetery for the Disinterment of a Marine Private killed by an IED in Al Anbar Province Iraq on 22 November 2006 killing him and two others.

As they stood at the grave site, a forklift arrives to raise a coffin from the vault that had interred it for nearly four years. Arlington knew at this point that the vault and coffin had been opened. When the family became aware of this action, an unsettling air of distrust settled upon the gathering. The father yells “you lied” as family members hold and calm him. The father already marred and angry by the uncooperative atmosphere and insensitivity of Arlington’s leadership; his grief now changes to anger. Another promise broken! Arlington, to seemingly cover their asses had breached the coffin the night before to ensure the Marine Private and the dog tags were in the assigned plot.

With a rotting corpse and the putrid stench of death permeating the air, a worker removes a dog tag from the coffin lid, wipes off the dirt, and hands it to the father. The forklift begins to raise the coffin; putrid water begins streaming out and those in attendance gasp as the fear of body parts falling from the unstable casket grips them.

Once removed, the coffin is lowered onto the bed of a truck and driven to a maintenance building where the verification process is to be held. In attendance inside were the father, a fellow Marine and friend of the Private who was to verify the remains, a Colonel, a Catholic Priest (arriving later), a Funeral Director, and some cemetery workers.

The father was already grieving and reeling from yet another confrontation with Arlington personnel the day before. He demanded and Arlington agreed the vault inside the grave would not be opened until he arrived the morning of the 15th. The father apprehensive about the day’s events was anxious if they would find his son inside. He fumed from yet another breach of trust. The father rejects the dog tags offered to him as verification by Arlington. The dog tags may have been sufficient had the integrity of the coffin not been breached. However, since it had been prior to the family’s arrival; the father then requested visual verification. The staff at Arlington appeared unprepared for what was to come next, thus tipping the father’s hand.

His adrenalin already maxed and because of Arlington’s ineptness, the father instinctively jumps onto the truck in his dress clothes despite the rancid odor. The father begins digging through the water soaked; stench filled rotting dismembered remains of his son, in search of the severed arm with a tattoo on it. Meanwhile the Funeral Director is standing to the side, gagging. The father looks at the Funeral Director and tells him, “Get over here and do your job!”

Arlington’s assistance during this time consisted of providing him with latex gloves. The father removes his rancid dress gloves used in digging through the soupy carnage and discards them in the trash. He also removes his jacket, hat and sunglasses, and continues to search for the missing arm. This arm with the tattoo would positively confirm that the unrecognizable severely decomposed corpse was his son’s. The father still searching as he inhales the pungent stench of rotting flesh discovers for the first time since his son’s death, that only a torso, arm, and leg were there.

Finally, after frantically searching the carnage, the arm is found under the torso with the tattoo mostly intact. The father in a gesture of love carefully and gently wipes away the dirt. He verifies his son. The veil of doubt is lifted. His son now placed in a new casket, the family looks on as the Private is reinterred, and now all are at peace.

Mammon, more than God, caused the Christchurch earthquake 'miracle'

By Geoffrey Lean World Last updated: September 5th, 2010

It’s an “absolute miracle” that no deaths have yet been reported from the earthquake that struck New Zealand early yesterday, says Bob Parker, mayor of the stricken city of Christchurch. You can see what he means – but Mammon may have had more to do with it than God. For it underlines how wealthy countries and communities suffer much less from a given natural disaster than poor ones.

The quake was the same magnitude, 7.1 on the Richter Scale as the one that hit Haiti in January, and its epicentre was slightly closer to Christchurch than the Caribbean one was from Port au Prince (13, as against 16, miles).But the latest estimates reckon that some 230,000 people died in Haiti, compared to no-one in New Zealand.

Of course there were differences. Yesterday’s quake hit at 4.35 in the morning – when almost everyone was indoors, asleep – for example, while January’s, with almost exact symmetry, occurred at 4.53 in the afternoon. But main difference is that New Zealand is just short of the top 30 countries in the world, listed by per capita GDP, while Haiti is firmly in the bottom 30.

Eighty per cent of earthquake deaths are caused by collapsing buildings and so properly built ones save lives in even the fiercest shocks, while poorly constructed ones become killers. Eighty six per cent of the people of Haiti live in tightly packed slums, and – besides those killed – two million were made homeless when buildings collapsed.

It has long been so, even in richer countries. Most of the 100,000 people who perished in a 1988 earthquake in Armenia – then part of the Soviet Union – were in cheap concrete buildings. And even in Japan, most of the structures that collapsed in the 1995 Kobe earthquake, which killed 5,000, were substandard constructions rushed up after the Second World War.

An 1976 earthquake in Guatemala City, which killed 23,000, was even dubbed the “class quake” because of the accuracy with which it hit the city’s poorest communities and spared the richer ones. So let’s be glad of the miracle in Christchurch – but recognise that world poverty is the greatest disaster of all.

Obama governing as promised, so what's wrong? (Yes, they're serious)

The New London Day ^ | September 5, 2010 | The Editors

Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 3:37:58 PM by 2ndDivisionVet

It is hard to recall another president who so aggressively pursued the policies he campaigned on only to see his popularity plummet as a result. But such is the case with President Barack Obama.

It is understandable why those who voted for Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona would be so disenchanted with the Obama administration. Sen. McCain, after all, sought a far different, more modest approach to health care policy. The Arizona senator made fiscal and social conservatism a priority, talked of tax cuts and emphasized gun rights. As expected, the president has followed a much different agenda.

Harder to understand are the many who voted for Mr. Obama, only to now abandon him. This quick change of heart is most apparent among the growing ranks of unaffiliated voters who tend to float back and forth each election cycle, fingers to the wind. Their disenchantment with the president and his Democratic Party will likely mean big losses for the Democrats in the congressional elections.

As Americans prepared for their Labor Day weekend, the Rasmussen presidential tracking poll showed only 27 percent strongly approving of the president's performance, 43 percent strongly disapproving.

No one, certainly, should have been surprised that President Obama sought a dramatic overhaul of the health care system, with an increased government role to play. It was a centerpiece of the Obama campaign, a regular in his stump speech. Did those backing Mr. Obama not expect it to be expensive, complex and result in a bitter political fight? Democratic leaders going back to President Truman had attempted health care reform and failed.

The prize for President Obama achieving it was lowered approval ratings for him and his party.

As for the war in Iraq, the president achieved his goal of ending combat operations. How things play out from here, as the U.S. military transitions to a support and advisory role, remains to be seen. But the president seemingly scored no political points on an issue that once dominated the national debate, but now is an afterthought for voters.

In fiscal matters, candidate Obama made ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans a priority and is pushing forward with that plan, which no longer appears very popular. He also promised to put the cost of two wars back in the budget, knowing it would make the fiscal situation look far worse. It has.

He did not campaign on bailing out auto industries, or launching a nearly $1 billion stimulus program, but the severity of the economic crisis demanded drastic action. The auto industry was saved and the stimulus mitigated the seriousness of the recession.

President Obama has not ended wasteful government spending or improved efficiency, as he advertised, but will get the chance when dealing with a next Congress in which Republicans will likely hold a stronger hand.

Cap-and-trade to reduce carbon emissions, a financial carrot to encourage education reforms, tougher regulation of Wall Street, were all policies the president campaigned on.

Perhaps many who voted for Mr. Obama never supported these policies. Maybe they just wanted change after eight years of the Bush administration and didn't read the fine print. Certainly the lack of a vigorous recovery from the Great Recession is dragging down the president's popularity, but no economist predicted a rapid rebound.

In many ways, he's exactly who he said he'd be, and many of those who voted for him apparently don't like it.

Lenin's New Economic Policy

The NEP of the 1920s Permitted a Soviet Version of a Market Economy

With the Soviet territory suffering from famine and deprivation, Lenin enacted a New Economic Policy that promoted trade, privatization, and enterprise.

Lenin's New Economic Policy, also known as the NEP, was a tacit acknowledgement of previous failures to socialize the Soviet economy. However, the New Economic Policy of the 1920s encouraged privatization and capitalism – the very thing the Bolsheviks rallied against. This caused confusion and resentment among some who had suffered from or believed in the Bolshevik's ideals.
Why Did Lenin Establish the New Economic Policy?

In 1921, lands and people under Soviet control were in desperate need of relief of the famine that was killing citizens in scores. Additionally, necessary goods, like cooking implements and clothing, were scarce. While Lenin had once admitted that he felt hungry people would spur on the Russian Revolution, now he knew that the country was collapsing under the weight of its residents' need.
What Did Lenin's New Economic Policy Do?

Lenin's New Economic Policy was, on a most basic level, a relaxation of strict socialism into a loose market society. Free trade was hesitantly encouraged. Lenin hoped that this injection of capitalism into the economy would drag Soviet Russia up by its bootstraps and pave the way for pure socialism after an adequate waiting period.

What Were the Results of Lenin's New Economic Policy?

Trade, manufacturing, and even agriculture began to boom. Eateries and shops were set up quickly and offered goods that had previously been absent from market stalls. Peasants who worked the land began to innovate with new technologies and procedures to offer market crops.

Enterprising individuals were everywhere; of course this meant that there were cutthroat businessmen who could buy and sell anything for profit, specifically for their own gain. These were the so-called Nepmen who flaunted their quick-won wealth and of whom the Bolsheviks were especially wary. The Nepmen were representative of everything the Revolution had meant to destroy – flagrant displays of wealth, extreme gaps between rich and poor, and the power that walked hand-in-hand with moneyed individuals.
The New Economic Policy's Affects on Foreign Trade and Finance

The NEP opened up Soviet Russia to limited international trade. Because citizens were making money both through domestic and international trade, there was greater need for banks, credit, and a stable form of currency. Lenin temporarily reversed his dismissal of the need for gold and used bullion to produce a new ruble currency.

Many hard-core Bolsheviks resented the NEP, but would-be businessmen reveled in the sudden market economy of the 1920s. While the New Economic Policy was not within keeping with the revolutionary ideals preached by politicians and intellectuals, for those who knew how to utilize the system, capitalism was a welcome change from severe deprivation.

References

Dziewanowski, M.K. A History of Soviet Russia. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1989.

Figes, Orlando. A People’s Tragedy: The Russian Revolution 1891-1924. New York: Penguin Books, 1996

Obama Administration Reverses Course, Forbids Sale of 850,000 Antique Rifles

The South Korean government, in an effort to raise money for its military, wants to sell nearly a million antique M1 rifles that were used by U.S. soldiers in the Korean War to gun collectors in America.

The Obama administration approved the sale of the American-made rifles last year. But it reversed course and banned the sale in March – a decision that went largely unnoticed at the time but that is now sparking opposition from gun rights advocates.

A State Department spokesman said the administration's decision was based on concerns that the guns could fall into the wrong hands.

"The transfer of such a large number of weapons -- 87,310 M1 Garands and 770,160 M1 Carbines -- could potentially be exploited by individuals seeking firearms for illicit purposes," the spokesman told FoxNews.com.

"We are working closely with our Korean allies and the U.S. Army in exploring alternative options to dispose of these firearms."

YOU MIGHT ALSO BE INTERESTED IN
Ten Worst Places to Live
3G Buying Burger King for $24/Share
8 Most Deceptive Terms Used in Credit Card Offers
7 Steps to Becoming a One-Income Family
Pending Home Sales Rise 5.2%

Gun control advocates praised the Obama administration for taking security seriously.

"Guns that can take high-capacity magazines are a threat to public safety," said Dennis Henigan of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "Even though they are old, these guns could deliver a great amount of firepower. So I think the Obama administration's concerns are well-taken."

But gun rights advocates point out that possessing M1 rifles is legal in the United States -- M1s are semi-automatics, not machine guns, meaning the trigger has to be pulled every time a shot is fired -- and anyone who would buy a gun from South Korea would have to go through the standard background check.

"Any guns that retail in the United States, of course, including these, can only be sold to someone who passes the National Instant Check System," said David Kopel, research director at the conservative Independence Institute. "There is no greater risk from these particular guns than there is from any other guns sold in the United States."

M1 carbines can hold high-capacity ammunition clips that allow dozens of rounds to be fired before re-loading, but Chris Cox, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, noted that is true about any gun in which an ammunition magazine can be inserted -- including most semi-automatics.

"Anything that accepts an external magazine could accept a larger capacity magazine," Cox said.

"But the average number of rounds fired in the commission of a crime is somewhere between 1 and 2 … this issue just shows how little the administration understands about guns."

He called the administration's decision "a de facto gun ban, courtesy of Hillary Clinton's State Department."

Asked why the M1s pose a threat, the State Department spokesman referred questions to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. ATF representatives said they would look into the question Monday afternoon, but on Wednesday they referred questions to the Justice Department. DOJ spokesman Dean Boyd referred questions back to the State Department.

According to the ATF Guidebook on Firearms Importation, it would normally be legal to import the M1s because they are more than 50 years old, meaning they qualify as "curios or relics." But because the guns were given to South Korea by the U.S. government, they fall under a special category that requires permission from the State Department before any sale.

Kopel said that he hopes the State Department spokesman's statement that it is working to "dispose" of the guns does not mean they want to melt them down.

"It seems to have this implication of destruction, which would be tremendously wasteful," he said. "These are guns that should be in the hands of American citizens for marksmanship and safety training."

Asked whether melting the guns down would be a good option, Henigan said: "Why let them into the country in the first place? If there is a legally sufficient way to keep them out, we think it's perfectly reasonable to do so."

Past administrations have also grappled with the issue of large-scale gun imports.

The Clinton administration blocked sales of M1s and other antiquated military weapons from the Philippines, Turkey and Pakistan. It also ended the practice of reselling used guns owned by federal agencies, ordering that they be melted down instead.

In contrast, 200,000 M1 rifles from South Korea were allowed to be sold in the U.S. under the Reagan administration in 1987.

A decision like that would be better for everyone, Cox said.

"M1s are used for target practice. For history buffs, they're highly collectible. We're going to continue to make sure that this backdoor effort that infringes not only on lawful commerce but on the Second Amendment is rectified."

Henigan disagrees.

"They clearly were used as military guns, and the fact that they likely can take high-capacity magazines makes them a special safety concern," he said.

The White House referred questions on the issue to the Pentagon, which referred questions to the U.S. Embassy in South Korea, which deferred back to the State Department.

'Islamization' of Paris a Warning to the West

PARIS - Friday in Paris. A hidden camera shows streets blocked by huge crowds of Muslim worshippers and enforced by a private security force.

This is all illegal in France: the public worship, the blocked streets, and the private security. But the police have been ordered not to intervene.

It shows that even though some in the French government want to get tough with Muslims and ban the burqa, other parts of the French government continue to give Islam a privileged status.

An ordinary French citizen who has been watching the Islamization of Paris decided that the world needed to see what was happening to his city. He used a hidden camera to start posting videos on YouTube. His life has been threatened and so he uses the alias of "Maxime Lepante. "

His camera shows that Muslims "are blocking the streets with barriers. They are praying on the ground. And the inhabitants of this district cannot leave their homes, nor go into their homes during those prayers."

"The Muslims taking over those streets do not have any authorization....so it's completely illegal," he says.

The Muslims in the street have been granted unofficial rights that no Christian group is likely to get under France's Laicite', or secularism law.

"It says people have the right to share any belief they want, any religion," Lepante explained. "But they have to practice at home or in the mosque, synagogues, churches and so on."

Some say Muslims must pray in the street because they need a larger mosque. But Lepante has observed cars coming from other parts of Paris, and he believes it is a weekly display of growing Muslim power.

"They are coming there to show that they can take over some French streets to show that they can conquer a part of the French territory," he said.

France's Islamic Future?

If France faces an Islamic future, a Russian author has already written about it. The novel is called "The Mosque of Notre Dame, 2048," a bestseller in Russia, not in France.

French publisher Jean Robin said the French media ignored the book because it was politically incorrect.

"Islam is seen as the religion of the poor people, so you can't say to the poor people, 'You're wrong,' otherwise, you're a fascist," Robin explained.

The book lays out a dark future when France has become a Muslim nation, and the famous cathedral has been turned into a mosque.

Whether that plot is farfetched depends on whom you ask. Muslims are said to be no more than 10 percent of the French population, although no one knows for sure because French law prohibits population counts by religion.

But the Muslim birthrate is significantly higher than for the native French. Some Muslim men practice polygamy, with each extra wife having children and collecting a welfare check.

"The problem of Islam is more than a problem of numbers," said French philosopher Radu Stoenescu, an Islamic expert who debates Muslim leaders on French TV. "The problem is one of principles. It's an open question. Is Islam an ideology or just a creed?"

"It doesn't matter how many there are," he aded. "The problem is the people who follow Islam; they're somehow in a political party, which has a political agenda, which means basically implementing Sharia and building an Islamic state."

In Denial or Fed Up

From the 1980s until recently, criticizing or opposing Islam was considered a social taboo, and so the government and media effectively helped Islam spread throughout France.

"We were expecting Islam to adapt to France and it is France adapting to Islam," Robin said.

About the burqa controversy, one French Muslim man told a reporter that Europeans should respect Muslim dress. One Parisian woman wearing a headscarf said "the veil is in the Koran" and "we only submit to God and nobody else."

But even if many government elites are in France are in denial over Islam, the people in the streets increasingly are not. Some have become fed up with what they see as the growing Islamization of France.

They've started staging pork and wine "aperitifs," or cocktail parties in the street. They're patriotic demonstrations meant to strike back against Islam. Another national demonstration is planned for Saturday, Sept. 4.

A Warning to the West

The French parliament is expected to debate the burqa law in September. Jean-Francois Cope, president of the Union for a Popular Movement political party, has a warning for the West and for America.

"We cannot accept the development of such practice because it's not compatible with the life in a modern society, you see," he said. "And this question is not only a French question. You will all have to face this challenge. "

For more insight on the slide toward a post-Christian Western society, check out Dale Hurd's blog Hurd on the Web.

For more insight on 'Islamization' around the world, check out Stakelbeck on Terror.

Islam Explained in Layman's Terms

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat.

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.

Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.

Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.

When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.

Here's how it works:

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:

United States -- Muslim 0.6% Australia -- Muslim 1.5% Canada -- Muslim 1.9% China -- Muslim 1.8% Italy -- Muslim 1.5% Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark -- Muslim 2% Germany -- Muslim 3.7% United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7% Spain -- Muslim 4% Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France -- Muslim 8% Philippines -- 5% Sweden -- Muslim 5% Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3% The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5% Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections in:

Guyana -- Muslim 10% India -- Muslim 13.4% Israel -- Muslim 16% Kenya -- Muslim 10% Russia -- Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40% Chad -- Muslim 53.1% Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania -- Muslim 70% Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4% Qatar -- Muslim 77..5% Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83% Egypt -- Muslim 90% Gaza -- Muslim 98.7% Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1% Iran -- Muslim 98% Iraq -- Muslim 97% Jordan -- Muslim 92% Morocco -- Muslim 98.7% Pakistan -- Muslim 97% Palestine -- Muslim 99% Syria -- Muslim 90% Tajikistan -- Muslim 90% Turkey -- Muslim 99.8% United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100% Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100% Somalia -- Muslim 100% Yemen -- Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

"Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel." -- Leon Uris, 'The Haj'

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.

BBC Chief Admits 'Massive' Left-wing Bias, Vows to Remedy Imbalance

By Lachlan Markay

BBC Director General Mark Thompson admitted to the UK Daily Mail in an article today that Britain's state-run news outlet has had a "massive" left-wing bias. He insisted, though, that the network is taking steps to remedy the ideological slant.

BBC has a history of promoting the ultra-leftist agenda on most issues. But to see the channel's top dog admit it in an interview with the Daily Mail was quite a sight.

Now if only some television outlets on this side of the pond would do the same.

While Thompson pleaded guilty to a liberal slant, he insisted that a new crop of journalists is changing the political face of the BBC.

The Daily Mail's Paul Revoir reported today:

The TV chief also admitted there had been a 'struggle' to achieve impartiality and that staff were ' mystified' by the early years of Margaret Thatcher's government.

But he claimed there was now 'much less overt tribalism' among the current crop of young journalists, and said in recent times the corporation was a 'broader church'.

He claimed there was now an 'honourable tradition of journalists from the right' working for the corporation.

His comments, made in the New Statesman magazine, are one of the clearest admissions of political bias from such a senior member of its staff.

The BBC has long been accused of being institutionally biased towards the Left, and an internal report from 2007 said it had to make greater efforts to avoid liberal bias.

Talk about honesty!

But while the BBC is looking into ways to remedy its "massive" slant to the left, swaths of the American news media have yet to even acknowledge that that slant exists.

First, do no harm...

Malaysian blogger faces jail over satirical post

A Malaysian journalist was charged Thursday over a satirical blog which made fun of the state power firm Tenaga, and faces a year's jail if convicted.

State media said that Irwan Abdul Rahman, a 36-year-old sub-editor with a Malay-language daily, pleaded not guilty in the Sessions Court to a charge of posting a fictitious comment.

It said he was accused of "intent to hurt" over the posting, entitled "TNB to sue WWF over Earth Hour" which jokingly said Tenaga would take action over the World Wildlife Fund's annual energy-saving initiative.

In an entry earlier this week, Irwan said on his blog http:nose4news.wordpress.com that he was hoping "for cool heads and a developed sense of humour to prevail".

He has deleted the offending item, which he said was merely "a stupid joke that does no one harm".

Malaysia's opposition condemned the prosecution as "not only harsh but ridiculous".

"Does this mean a satire or a joke is now illegal in Malaysia? What has become of our country?" said Lim Guan Eng, secretary-general of the Democratic Action Party which is a member of the opposition alliance.

Lim said Malaysia had a great tradition of satire, which was also used in the independence struggle against British colonial rule, and that the government must respect freedom of expression.

Irwan's prosecution has caused a stir because unlike the mainstream press, the web and online media in Malaysia have remained relatively free, despite occasional raids, bans and government criticism.

Major newspapers and broadcasters are closely linked with the ruling coalition, so the Internet has become a lively forum for dissent and debate.

The government in 1996 pledged not to censor online content as part of a campaign to promote its information technology sector.

Can Preschoolers Be Depressed?

Kiran didn’t seem like the type of kid parents should worry about. “He was the easy one,” his father, Raghu, a physician, says. “He always wanted to please.” Unlike other children in his suburban St. Louis preschool, Kiran (a nickname his parents asked me to use to protect his identity) rarely disobeyed or acted out. If he dawdled or didn’t listen, Raghu (also a nickname) had only to count to five before Kiran hastened to tie his shoes or put the toys away. He was kind to other children; if a classmate cried, Kiran immediately approached. “Our little empath!” his parents proudly called him.

But there were worrisome signs. For one thing, unlike your typical joyful and carefree 4-year-old, Kiran didn’t have a lot of fun. “He wasn’t running around, bouncing about, battling to get to the top of the slide like other kids,” Raghu notes. Kiran’s mother, Elizabeth (her middle name), an engineer, recalls constant refrains of “Nothing is fun; I’m bored.” When Raghu and Elizabeth reminded a downbeat Kiran of their coming trip to Disney World, Kiran responded: “Mickey lies. Dreams don’t come true.”

Over time, especially in comparison with Kiran’s even-keeled younger sister, it became apparent that guilt and worry infused Kiran’s thoughts. “We had to be really careful when we told him he did something wrong, because he internalized it quickly,” Raghu says. He was also easily frustrated. He wouldn’t dare count aloud until he had perfected getting to 10. Puzzles drove him nuts. After toying with a new set of Legos, he told his father, “I can’t do Legos.” He then roundly declared: “I will never do them. I am not a Legos person. You should take them away.”

One weekend when he was 4, Kiran carried his blanket around as his mother ferried him from one child-friendly place to the next, trying to divert him. But even at St. Louis’s children’s museum, he was listless and leaned against the wall. When they got home, he lay down and said he couldn’t remember anything fun about the whole day. He was “draggy and superwhiny and seeming like he was in pain.” Elizabeth remembers thinking, Something is wrong with this kid.

After talks with the director of Kiran’s preschool, who was similarly troubled by his behavior, and a round of medical Googling, Kiran’s parents took him to see a child psychiatrist. In the winter of 2009, when Kiran was 5, his parents were told that he had preschool depression, sometimes referred to as “early-onset depression.” He was entered into a research study at the Early Emotional Development Program at Washington University Medical School in St. Louis, which tracks the diagnosis of preschool depression and the treatment of children like Kiran. “It was painful,” Elizabeth says, “but also a relief to have professionals confirm that, yes, he has had a depressive episode. It’s real.”

Is it really possible to diagnose such a grown-up affliction in such a young child? And is diagnosing clinical depression in a preschooler a good idea, or are children that young too immature, too changeable, too temperamental to be laden with such a momentous label? Preschool depression may be a legitimate ailment, one that could gain traction with parents in the way that attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (A.D.H.D.) and oppositional defiant disorder (O.D.D.) — afflictions few people heard of 30 years ago — have entered the what-to-worry-about lexicon. But when the rate of development among children varies so widely and burgeoning personalities are still in flux, how can we know at what point a child crosses the line from altogether unremarkable to somewhat different to clinically disordered? Just how early can depression begin?

The answer, according to recent research, seems to be earlier than expected. Today a number of child psychiatrists and developmental psychologists say depression can surface in children as young as 2 or 3. “The idea is very threatening,” says Joan Luby, a professor of child psychiatry at Washington University School of Medicine, who gave Kiran his diagnosis and whose research on preschool depression has often met with resistance. “In my 20 years of research, it’s been slowly eroding,” Luby says of that resistance. “But some hard-core scientists still brush the idea off as mushy or psychobabble, and laypeople think the idea is ridiculous.”

For adults who have known depression, however, the prospect of early diagnosis makes sense. Kiran’s mother had what she now recognizes was childhood depression. “There were definite signs throughout my grade-school years,” she says. Had therapy been available to her then, she imagines that she would have leapt at the chance. “My parents knew my behavior wasn’t right, but they really didn’t know what to do.”

One third of parents think playing with their children is BORING

As any parent will know, keeping your little ones entertained isn't exactly child’s play.

But in a surprising trend computers seem to have become the new electronic babysitter.

One in three parents play computer games with their children instead of the more traditional ball games in the garden or visit to a playground.

Yet nine out of ten children said electronic games were something they would rather play on their own.

And three quarters of the children surveyed said they would prefer to spend time with their parents actually interacting with them in some way challenging each other, for example, at board games.

The report also reveals that in today’s time-starved society one in five parents forget to play with their children as they are too busy or can’t think of anything to do.

It seems play is in danger of becoming a lost art for families as almost a third of parents even think that spending time with their children is boring.

Professor Tanya Byron, a child psychologist, interviewed 2,000 parents and 2,000 children aged five to 15 to examine the play habits of the nation for her ‘State of Play, Back to Basics’ report.

She found that although children still enjoy the same pursuits as their parents did when they were growing up, there was a widening gulf between what children wanted to do and what their parents thought they wanted to do.

Lack of communication between the generations was a key problem, and that meant that both adults and children were left dispirited and less likely to talk to each other.
30 per cent of parents admitted that they think playing with their children is boring, and over one in ten children (16 per cent) picked up that they feel this way.

Professor Tanya Byron said of the findings: ‘There are four key ingredients to a successful playtime between parents and children namely: education, inspiration, integration and communication.

‘Parents need to take a step back and think back to how their own childhood games used these four pillars and how they can implement them now. The key thing is to have an open and honest dialogue between parents and children and to embrace play environments which provide a great training ground for parents to practice the art of imaginative play by using objects and experiences that are recognisable whatever your age.

‘Cross generational enjoyment, where no family member feels inhibited, under pressure, bored or stressed are key to making these four pillars become part of everyday play.’

She recommended that parents go ‘back to basics’ by remembering what they liked doing when they were young, such as dressing up or playing games, to inspire their playtime with their young.

The report was commissioned by Disneyland Paris which has just opened a new Toy Story themed ‘Playland’.

Un-bull-ievable! Calf saved from the farmer's shotgun grows into towering 6ft 5in, one-tonne beast

Amazingly, the seven-year-old bullock is still growing meaning he could smash through the current British record in a matter of months.

When Shaun, a carpet fitter, saved Trigger he had no idea his new black and white friend would grow up to his magnificent size.

Trigger's enormous weight means he could potentially make 7,665 Big Macs or even 6,137 Burger King Whoppers.

But family pet Trigger lives a life far removed from that of your average livestock.

Instead he enjoys a relaxed lifestyle in a field at Kingswood, Herefordshire, where he eats a daily diet of grass, cattle cake, mineral lick and a packet of apples every week.

Shaun said: 'When you get up close to him, he really is quite imposing.

'He's growing steadily and he's gained an inch in the last 12 months, so he's coming towards the British record, which is about 6ft 7in.

'A friend who owns a couple of fields said I could borrow them for as long as I wanted, so I grasped the opportunity and got a little calf, and fed him up.

Cheating hubby exposed thanks to saman ekor

KUALA LUMPUR: A man who was caught on camera for speeding turned out to be having a joyride with his lover.

His wife found out about the affair by accident after she and her husband went to MCA public services and complaints department head Datuk Michael Chong to complain about a saman ekor they had received.

The retired couple, in their 60s from Petaling Jaya, vehemently maintained that the police had mistakenly issued a summons to them, Chong said.

“They claimed they were never on the Karak Highway, so it was impossible for them to have been caught speeding there.

“The wife said they only drove the car to nearby places. Besides that, she was with her husband most of the time,” said Chong yesterday.

Upon hearing their dilemma, Chong advised them to get from the police a photo of the alleged offence although the husband was reluctant to do so.

“However, the wife decided to pay the RM10 that was required to check out the photo,” he said.

Chong said the couple came back to check the photo two weeks later, but the husband quickly grabbed the envelope with the photo.

“The husband refused to open the envelope and said they would open it at home as they did not want to waste my time,” he said.

However, Chong said the wife insisted on opening it in front of him because the wife was confident that there was a mistake in the summons and wanted him to settle the matter for them.

“To the wife’s shock, the photo clearly showed the husband driving the car with another woman sitting beside him,” said Chong.

Chong said the wife was furious and grabbed her umbrella to hit the husband.

“I quickly stood between them and asked the husband to leave. I do not know what happened to them after the incident,” he said.

Miracle mum brings premature baby son back to life with two hours of loving cuddles after doctors pronounce him dead

It was a final chance to say goodbye for grieving mother Kate Ogg after doctors gave up hope of saving her premature baby.

She tearfully told her lifeless son - born at 27 weeks weighing 2lb - how much she loved him and cuddled him tightly, not wanting to let him go.

Although little Jamie's twin sister Emily had been delivered successfully, doctors had given Mrs Ogg the news all mothers dread - that after 20 minutes of battling to get her son to breathe, they had declared him dead.

Having given up on a miracle, Mrs Ogg unwrapped the baby from his blanket and held him against her skin. And then an extraordinary thing happened.

After two hours of being hugged, touched and spoken to by his mother, the little boy began showing signs of life.

At first, it was just a gasp for air that was dismissed by doctors as a reflex action.

But then the startled mother fed him a little breast milk on her finger and he started breathing normally.

'I thought, "Oh my God, what's going on",' said Mrs Ogg.

'A short time later he opened his eyes. It was a miracle. Then he held out his hand and grabbed my finger.

'He opened his eyes and moved his head from side to side. The doctor kept shaking his head saying, "I don't believe it, I don't believe it".'

The Australian mother spoke publicly for the first time yesterday to highlight the importance of skin-on-skin care for sick babies, which is being used at an increasing number of British hospitals.

But the 'kangaroo care' technique, named after the way kangaroos hold their young in a pouch next to their bodies, allows the mother to act as a human incubator to keep babies warm, stimulated and fed.

Pre-term and low birth-weight babies treated with the skin-to-skin method have also been shown to have lower infection rates, less severe illness, improved sleep patterns and are at reduced risk of hypothermia.

Mrs Ogg and her husband David told how doctors gave up on saving their son after a three-hour labour in a Sydney hospital in March.

'The doctor asked me had we chosen a name for our son,' said Mrs Ogg. 'I said, "Jamie", and he turned around with my son already wrapped up and said, "We've lost Jamie, he didn't make it, sorry".

'It was the worse feeling I've ever felt. I unwrapped Jamie from his blanket. He was very limp.

'I took my gown off and arranged him on my chest with his head over my arm and just held him. He wasn't moving at all and we just started talking to him.

'We told him what his name was and that he had a sister. We told him the things we wanted to do with him throughout his life.

'Jamie occasionally gasped for air, which doctors said was a reflex action. But then I felt him move as if he were startled, then he started gasping more and more regularly.

'I gave Jamie some breast milk on my finger, he took it and started regular breathing.'

Mrs Ogg held her son, now five months old and fully recovered, as she spoke on the Australian TV show Today Tonight.

Her husband added: 'Luckily I've got a very strong, very smart wife.

'She instinctively did what she did. If she hadn't done that, Jamie probably wouldn't be here.'

Super-Glue: Best practice for countering key stroke loggers

This wonderful little gadget is for sale over at Thinkgeek. It is colored an innocuous IBM grey so no one will notice when you attach it to their keyboard. It fits between the back of the PC and the keyboard cable. It needs no power and it can record 130,000 keystrokes. It works like a software keystroke logger. Once it is installed it just captures anything that is typed: usernames, passwords, URLs, email, banking info, everything. To access the data the owner of the device just types the password into any word processor and then you start to communicate with the device. It is very slick. Of course the primary difference between this and a software keystroke logger is that there is NO WAY to detect it and remove it.

Of course this is exactly how the greatest attempted bank heist in history was pulled off. The bank robbers installed these devices on machines inside the bank and eventually got access to Sumitomo Bank’s wire transfer capability. They then proceeded to transfer more that $440 million to various accounts in other countries. Read all the gory details in this article I just published.

The one thing I do not mention in the article is that it is reported that Sumitomo Bank’s best practice for avoiding a repeat attack is that they now super-glue the keyboard connections into the backs of their PCs.

Anger as ex-finance minister warns Muslims 'making Germany stupid'

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.

The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the infence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it.

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.

It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”

Sir Winston Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50, London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).

For Obamacare supporters, judgment days approaches

Washington Examiner (newspaper) ^ | 8/23/2010 | Byron York

Posted on Tuesday, August 24, 2010 9:27:07 AM by markomalley

Say you're a Democratic member of Congress. You proudly cast your vote for Obamacare, you cheered when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hailed it as the achievement of a generation and you scoffed at Republicans who vowed to repeal it. Now you're running for re-election, and a voter asks: What is the most important thing you've done in the last two years?

The answer should be easy. In passing the national health care bill, you accomplished something your party dreamed of for decades. It was your most important vote, and now is the time to take credit for it.

Except it's not.

Recently a number of top Democratic strategists conducted focus groups in Las Vegas, Charlotte, Philadelphia and St. Louis. They also conducted a national poll of 1,000 likely voters and an online poll of 2,000 more likely voters. They wanted to measure the public's feelings about Obamacare and help Democrats make an effective case for the bill they passed in March.

The researchers found what they call a "challenging environment," which is a nicer way of saying "disaster in the making." Voters simply aren't buying the Democratic case that health care reform will insure more than 30 million currently uninsured people and save money at the same time. And when they think about their own health care, people worry that reform will mean less, not more, availability of care, and at a higher cost.

Faced with that bad news, the pollsters came up with several recommendations for Democratic candidates. When talking about Obamacare, Democrats should "keep claims small and credible." They should promise to "improve" the law. They should avoid talking about policy and stick to "personal stories" of people who will benefit from Obamacare. And above all, the pollsters advise, "don't say the law will reduce costs and deficit."

It's a stunning about-face for a party that saw national health care as its signature accomplishment. "This is the first time we've seen from Democrats that they clearly understand they have a serious problem in terms of selling this legislation," says Republican pollster David Winston.

The reluctance to defend Obamacare as a cost-cutter and deficit-reducer is particularly telling. Wasn't that the No. 1 reason for passing the bill in the first place? "This legislation will ... lower costs for families and for businesses and for the federal government, reducing our deficit by over $1 trillion in the next two decades," President Obama said when he signed the bill into law on March 23. Now, Democrats are throwing that argument out the window.

It's no mystery why the party is in retreat. The public's disapproval of Obamacare hasn't changed in the last five months. The RealClearPolitics average of recent polls shows 52 percent of Americans oppose the new law, while 39 percent support it. A variety of pollsters -- Rasmussen, CNN, Pew, and CBS News -- all find significantly more opposition than support. And there's not just opposition but enthusiasm for outright repeal. "Overall support for repeal has ranged from 52 percent to 63 percent since the law was passed by Congress in March," writes Rasmussen.

The story might be even worse than that for Democrats. Everyone knows the public's top issue is the economy. It has been since before Obama took office. So when the president and Democratic congressional leadership devoted a year to passing national health care, Republicans charged they were ignoring the public's wishes. Now, when Democrats admit that Obamacare won't cut costs or reduce deficits, they open themselves up to a more serious charge: they spent a year working on something that will actually cost jobs and make things worse.

"Before it looked like they were just on the wrong topic," says David Winston. "Now, it makes it look like they're actually going to hurt the economy."

No wonder Obama and Democratic leaders are constantly saying they want to look forward, not back. They don't want to dwell on ancient history, like the events of 2009 and early 2010. But there is no chance in the world Republicans will let them forget it.

Just a few months ago, Obama issued a very public challenge to opponents who seek to dump Obamacare. "For those Republicans and folks who are on the 'repeal' platform, my attitude is, go for it," the president told a cheering crowd at a Democratic fundraiser in Florida April 15. "I'll have that fight. We'll have that argument."

Well, the time to fight, the time to argue, has arrived. But with everything on the line, the president's party is trying to run away.

Controversy in Saudi Arabia over Fatwa Permitting Breastfeeding of Adults

Introduction

Sheikh 'Abd Al-Muhsin Al-'Obikan, an advisor at the Saudi Justice Ministry, recently issued a fatwa allowing the breastfeeding of adults. The fatwa is aimed at enabling an unrelated man and woman to be secluded in the same room, a situation which Islam considers forbidden gender mixing. The rationale behind the fatwa is that breastfeeding creates a bond of kinship between the man and woman, rendering the man her mahram,[1] thus making it acceptable for them to be together in seclusion.

The fatwa created a stir in Saudi Arabia and in the Arab media at large, arousing a wave of criticism from clerics and columnists alike. Clerics claimed that breastfeeding could not create a bond of kinship between a female and an unrelated male over two years of age, and some claimed that the fatwa contradicted the shari'a. Columnists argued that such grotesque fatwas are insulting to women, and also tarnish the Muslims' image. One columnist pointed to a paradox, namely that the fear of gender-mixing is prompting clerics to encourage lewd behaviors like women breastfeeding grown men.

Despite this criticism, Al-'Obikan has stood his ground, and even reiterated his position in greater detail.

It should be noted that this issue first arose in Egypt in May 2007, following a similar fatwa issued by Dr. 'Izzat 'Atiyya, formerly head of the Hadith Department at Al-Azhar University, which permitted a woman to breastfeed a man with whom she must work in private. This fatwa led to 'Atiyya's dismissal from his post at Al-Azhar.[2]

The following document presents the fatwa issued by Al-'Obikan and several reactions to it.

Al-'Obikan: Adult Breastfeeding Permissible in Two Specific Cases

In a May 21, 2010 interview for the Al-Arabiya website, Al-'Obikan said it is permissible for a woman to breastfeed a man who is not a family member: "If a family [employs] an outsider who visits the home frequently, and [this man] has no relatives besides this family – and his presence burdens the members of the household, especially when women are present – it is permissible for a woman to breastfeed him." Al-'Obikan based his argument on a hadith attributed to Muhammad's wife, 'Aisha, which relates that Salem, the adopted son of Abu Hudheifa, was breastfed by Abu-Hudheifa's wife when he was already a grown man with a beard, by the Prophet's decree. Al-'Obikan stressed that the principle represented by this hadith is not limited to a specific time or place, but is universally applicable. He added, however, that a man should not be breastfed directly from a woman's breast, but should be given milk which has been breast pumped.[3]

In a communiqué he posted to his website, Al-'Obikan claimed that the breastfeeding of an unrelated male is also permissible in cases where a family decides to adopt an orphan child, who is likely to find himself in seclusion with the women of the household. According to the communiqué, one of the women in the family must pump milk for the orphan – enough for five mouthfuls – and this renders him the woman's son, thereby solving the problem of seclusion.[4]

Al-'Obikan's statements met with severe censure in the Saudi press. A number of articles in the daily Al-Riyadh presented readers' comments on the issue. Some of the readers argued that only moral education could address the issue of male and female seclusion. Others called for the establishment of a body that would prevent the issuing of strange fatwas such as these, or publish a clear response to any such fatwa issued.[5] Al-'Obikan's statements were also disapproved of by Saudi clerics and columnists.

In response to this criticism, Al-'Obikan clarified that his fatwa is not meant to permit women to breastfeed men in their workplace – hinting at the Egyptian fatwa, which did permit this – because such a permission was improper and extreme.[6] He added: "It is regrettable that there are those who are hasty to react to religious rulings, and misinterpret [them] without verifying them... Some understood my fatwa to apply to drivers, servants, and other 'outsiders,' but this is only permissible in rare cases."[7] In an interview with the Saudi government daily 'Okaz, Al-'Obikan reiterated his previous statements in greater detail, explaining that by "outsider" he did not mean a non-Saudi, but a Saudi who was not considered the woman's mahram. In another interview, Al-'Obikan said that his ruling is based on shari'a proofs, and that he does not therefore intend to reconsider it.[8]

15 Weeks On, Flash Crash Still Baffles, Ominously

It sounds like “Wall Street” meets “The X-Files.”

The stock market mysteriously plunges 600 points — and then, more mysteriously, recovers within minutes. Over the next few weeks, analysts at Nanex, an obscure data company in the suburbs of Chicago, examine trading charts from the day and are stunned to find some oddly compelling shapes and patterns in the data.

To the Nanex analysts, these are crop circles of the financial kind, containing clues to the mystery of what happened in the markets on May 6 and what might have caused the still-unexplained flash crash.

The charts — which are visual representations of bid prices, ask prices, order sizes and other trading activity — are inspiring many theories on Wall Street, some of them based on hard-nosed financial analysis and others of the black-helicopter variety.

To some people, like Eric Scott Hunsader, the founder of Nanex, they suggest that the specialized computers responsible for so much of today’s stock trading simply overloaded the exchanges.

He and others are tempted to go further, hypothesizing that the bizarre patterns might have been the result of a Wall Street version of cyberwarfare. They say high-speed traders could have been trying to outwit one another’s computers with blizzards of buy and sell orders that were never meant to be filled. These superfast traders might even have been trying to clog exchanges to outflank other investors.

Jeffrey Donovan, a Nanex developer, first noticed the apparent anomalies. “Something is not right,” he said as he reviewed the charts.

Mr. Donovan, a man with a runaway chuckle who works alone out of the company’s office in Santa Barbara, Calif., poses a theory that a small group of high-frequency traders was trying to introduce delays into the nation’s fractured stock-market trading system to profit at the expense of others. Clogging exchanges or otherwise disrupting markets to gain an advantage may be illegal.

Mr. Donovan indulges Wall Street’s increasing fascination with the charts by christening more of them each day, with names like Continental Crust, Broken Highway and Twilight.

There is also the Bandsaw, a zigzag pattern of prices that appear and then abruptly vanish. There is the Knife, a sharp, narrowing price sequence. There is the Crystal Triangle, the Bar Code, the Mountain Range, each one stranger than the last.

The truth of what happened on May 6 could be hiding somewhere in those mysterious configurations. Or it may lie somewhere else entirely. But 15 weeks later, the authorities are still looking for it. The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission plan to issue a final report on their findings in September.

A preliminary report in May blamed a confluence of factors, including worries over rising sovereign debt and a lack of marketwide circuit breakers, but the new report is expected to go further.

For now, this much is known: The markets were already down and on edge that morning as Europe’s debt crisis seemed to be spiraling out of control.

As markets fell, a mutual fund manager in Kansas made a big sale of stock futures. The rout, some say, was worsened by a lack of coordination among the dozens of exchanges that make up the modern-day stock market. As the New York Stock Exchange slowed trading, rival exchanges that were more automated allowed the selling to continue.

“It’s just madness to say we don’t know what caused it. We do,” said Steve Wunsch, a market structure consultant. “The crash was an inevitable consequence of creating multiple market centers.”

That is one explanation. Others have pointed to the high-frequency traders, who use powerful computers to transmit millions of orders at lightning speed. Some of these traders, who now dominate the stock market, appear to have fled the market as prices went haywire.

Then their computer programs might have dragged down exchange-traded funds, popular investment vehicles that fell sharply during the crash, said Thomas Peterffy, chief executive of Interactive Brokers.

“Computerized arbitrage kicked in,” he said.

But if Nanex’s theory is to be believed, computer algorithms might have been at work as well, knowingly or unknowingly wreaking havoc and creating data crop circles.

“There is a credible allegation that there is seriously abusive practices going on,” said James J. Angel, a financial market analyst specialist at Georgetown University, “to the extent that somebody is firing in a very high frequency of orders for no good economic reason, basically because they are trying to slow everybody else down.”

At a Washington hearing on the flash crash last week, Kevin Cronin, director of global equity trading at Invesco, a big fund manager, warned about “improper or manipulative activity” in the stock market.

Traders at BMO Capital Markets in Toronto said they had also identified a “data deluge” a few minutes before the crash. They said people in the markets were poring over Nanex’s colorful charts.

“Whether they are intentional or not, the regulators should be looking into it closely,” said Doug Clark, managing director of BMO Capital Markets.

In an Aug. 5 letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission, Senator Edward E. Kaufman, Democrat of Delaware, warned about a “micro-arms race that is being waged in our public marketplace by high-frequency traders and others.” He said that the traders were moving so fast that regulators could not keep up.

The idea that shadowy computer masterminds were trying to disrupt the nation’s stock trading struck many people as ridiculous. Wall Street experts generally characterize it as a conspiracy theory with little basis in fact.

But some of the patterns suggested that traders might have been testing their high-speed computers, perhaps to see how rivals would react.

Or it may just be that the computers produced so much data so quickly that exchanges simply could not cope with the onslaught.

“We live in a day when things are measured in milliseconds,” said Sang Lee of the Aite Group, a financial services consulting company. “It is meant to be a level playing field, but if you have better technology you will have the edge.”

Back in Chicago, Mr. Hunsader of Nanex is still not sure what his crop circles mean. But that does not stop him from admiring them.

“The patterns are quite beautiful,” he said. “We can’t see any economic reasons for what they are doing.”

Bond bubble fear returns as investors flee stocks

NEW YORK – Maybe bonds aren't so dull after all.

Bad economic news sent investors out of stocks and into U.S. Treasurys this past week, extending a rally that has defied some of Wall Street's best minds, and, some say, logic. Treasury bonds maturing in 20 years or more have returned 2.1 percent so far this year. By contrast, stocks in the Dow Jones industrial average have lost 2 percent.

The question now: Is it too late to jump into the great government bond bonanza?

To bulls, the rally is still in its early stages. They say the weak economy will cause stocks to keep falling and people to seek the safety of U.S. government debt. Reports this past week of unexpectedly high unemployment claims and a manufacturing slowdown in the mid-Atlantic region helped bolster their case.

But others say Treasury prices have risen too high, perhaps even to bubble proportions. The thinking goes that investors could dump Treasurys as quickly as they bought them on even a whiff of inflation. Inflation is bad for bonds because it eats into principal.

Bonds are generally regarded as safer than stocks because you get your money back when they mature. But that's only true if you pay face value. If you buy when prices are higher, say $101 for a $100 bond, you'll get $1 less than you put in. In purchasing power, you get back even less thanks to inflation. But bonds, of course, also pay interest, and this can more than make up the difference.

The problem is, bond bears argue, the interest isn't compensating you much now. The yield on 10-year Treasurys, which moves opposite its price, stands at 2.61 percent, a low not seen since early 2009 during the depths of the credit crisis. At that rate, it would take you 27 years to double your money.

"In the long run we don't think you'll make a good return" in government bonds, says Mark Phelps, CEO of money manager W.P. Stewart & Co., citing the low yields.

Phelps suggests that investors worried about a stalled recovery should stick to stocks of big, conservative companies with little debt and fat dividends. Though you can still get hurt if their stocks fall, at least the dividends will help compensate.

An added appeal: The dividends offered by such blue chips are higher than current 10-year Treasury yields.

PepsiCo Inc., for instance, will pay you $3 annually now for every $100 you invest — nearly 50 cents more than Washington pays for holding your money for 10 years. What's more, the stock is trading at 14.5 times estimated annual earnings. The median, or midpoint, over the past 20 years is 23 times estimated earnings, meaning the stock is cheap, at least by this one measure.

Phelps also likes Procter & Gamble Co. stock. It pays you even more than Pepsi — $3.20 a year for every $100 invested. The maker of Pampers diapers and Pringles chips trades at 14.8 times estimated earnings, a discount to its 19 median.

"To put all in Treasurys, looks like a mistake to us," says Phelps, whose firm manages $1.5 billion. But he adds, "I would have said that at the beginning of the year, and I would have been wrong."

He's got good company.

For years, famed investors and economists have been warning that the price of Treasurys had risen too high. Bill Gross of giant bond firm Pimco said that Treasurys had some "bubble characteristics" in December 2008 when 10-year yields neared 2 percent. Nouriel Roubini, who gained near celebrity status after calling the crash, warned of a bubble about the same time. In a letter to his Berkshire Hathaway shareholders last year, Warren Buffett compared the "U.S. Treasury bond bubble of late 2008" to the Internet and housing bubbles.

However, as fears of an economic collapse receded last year, investors rushed into stocks and out of Treasurys, sending prices down and yields up. Now, as yields slip closer to their late 2008 lows, bubble talk has returned.

On Wednesday The Wall Street Journal published a letter from Wharton professor Jeremy Siegel and Jeremy Schwartz, director of research at Wisdom Tree Investments Inc., that likened Treasurys to dot-com stocks of the late '90s before they crashed. The headline: "The Great American Bond Bubble." They noted that yields on some bonds are the lowest in 55 years.

Their advice to investors will sound familiar: Buy blue chips with fat dividends.

Avi Tiomkin, chief investment officer of Tigris Financial Group and a Treasury bull for years, disagrees.

"Dividends are great as long as a company can make money," he says. "But if the economy sinks, they'll stop paying."

Tiomkin says he's sticking with Washington IOUs. A year ago he correctly predicted the 10-year yield would fall from 3.75 percent to around 2.50 percent by mid-2010. Now he foresees deflation, or a consistent and widespread fall in prices for goods and services similar to what afflicted Japan during the '90s. And that will drive more people into Treasurys, lifting prices and pushing 10-year yields to below 2 percent, possibly all the way to 1 percent, within a year.

Van Hoisington, president of an eponymous investment firm in Austin, Texas, who also foresaw the Treasury rally, is not buying all the bubble talk either. In his latest newsletter, he writes that "The risk, if not the probability, is that deflation lies ahead."

He recommends buying Treasury bonds, as he has done for years now. He has returned 11 percent over three years.

Jack Ablin, chief investment officer at Harris Private Bank, prefers stocks. But even he's worried.

Ablin notes that Federal Reserve interest rate cuts intended to spur borrowing and spending don't have much of an impact if people are swimming in debt and can't or won't borrow. If prices of consumer goods fall, he says, that will make matters worse as people defer purchases in hopes they can buy cheaper later.

"There is little (the Fed) can do but stand on sidelines with pom poms and cheer people on," he says.

Wife loses Malaysian mountaineer Muslim conversion case

A Malaysian Hindu woman on Friday lost the latest round of a battle to prove that her husband, a noted mountaineer, was a Hindu and not a Muslim convert as authorities claim.

M. Moorthy, who was a member of a 1997 Malaysian Mount Everest expedition, died in 2005 and was buried as a Muslim on the insistence of religious authorities and against the wishes of his wife S. Kaliammal, 35.

Lawyer M. Manoharan said the Court of Appeal maintained that the Islamic Sharia court had jurisdiction to determine Moorthy's religious status and that the civil court could not interfere.

The decision was designed to "shut us up", he said. "It is not fair. The wife is very upset. We will take it to the highest court in the land -- the Federal Court," he told AFP. "The battle is not over yet."

"The Sharia court should not stray into areas outside their religion when there is a question of competing religion," he said.

Moorthy's wife said she had no idea of any conversation and cast doubt on his ability to make such a decision given that he had been ill for many years before his death.

Days after Moorthy's demise at the age of 36, the High Court ruled it would not disturb the declaration that he was a Muslim as it was a matter for the religious courts.

Malaysia has a dual-track legal system, with the civil courts and the Sharia courts operating side by side. Non-Muslims say they do not get a fair hearing when cases involving them end up in religious courts.

Conversion rows, including "body-snatching" cases when Islamic authorities have battled with relatives over the remains of people whose religion is disputed, are common in Muslim-majority Malaysia.

The tussles have raised allegations that the country is being "Islamised" and that the rights of the ethnic Chinese and Indian minorities are being eroded.

Property investment in the new decade

The times have been good for property investors in the past couple of years. Prices in certain areas, particularly in selected areas of Kuala Lumpur and Petaling Jaya have risen significantly, some as high as 50 percent. And as a result of this rise, practically all property investors had made money. In fact, some people have seen their net worth jump up by 30 or 40 percent because of the price rise. For example, a young colleague who purchased their house two years ago saw the value of their house increase from RM950,000 to RM1.3 million today. Of course, the owner was all smiles when they told me the story.

I am happy for them. As an avid property investor, I have benefitted from the rise myself, so I am certainly not complaining. At the same time, I must admit that I have some reservation about the whole scenario. The price rise has distorted reality to many investors, including my colleague. Because the price climbed up as soon as he bought the property, and remained at a high level even today, his view on property investment is seriously distorted. He thinks that:

1. Prices will go up as soon you buy a property.
2. The gains will be in double digits per annum.
3. This is normal.
4. Prices always go up.
5. It is easy to make money in properties.
6. He is a super genius when it comes to property investment!

Long-term property investors will quickly point out that none of the above are true. That’s right – none! For starters, I can tell you the current situation is exceptional. It wasn’t like this five years ago, and certainly not ten years ago. I can also tell you that times are not going to remain this good forever. Prices do not rise to the sky, and interest rates do not stay low forever. In fact, interest rates has already climbed (or to use the toned down term of ‘normalised’) by 75 basis points already this year.

Why am I so sure of this? Simple; I have seen similar euphoria before (the first in the mid-1980s and then in year 1997 during the Asian Currency Crisis), and the story did not end well on both occasions. Like most bubbles, prices edged up slowly initially. The initial buyers made money and this attracted others to invest into properties as well. And as prices climbed higher and higher, the euphoria got to the levels that some people were rushing to buy because they were scared that the prices will spiral out of their reach if they do not act then. But when the market crashed, as all bubbles eventually do, a lot of people were seriously hit, a lot of money was lost, and that included seeing their properties being auctioned off by the banks.

I see the same story being repeated today. On top of the ever present dangers, there will be massive challenges in this new decade. There will be much turbulence in the coming days, and some of them will be unlike what you and I have seen or experienced before. This may include double-digit interest rates, multiple bank failures, currency crashes and explosion of the derivatives market.

As a result of the new challenges, the investors using the current success formula of buying five properties at one go (by paying the minimum down payment and borrowing to the hilt) will be seriously hammered. They will experience much pain, to put it mildly. Some people will lose their properties, some will lose more than money and yes, some will become ex-millionaires.

But of course, where there is danger, there are also opportunities. This will include a huge number of properties being auctioned and also getting huge discounts from distressed sellers.

For more information about Azizi Ali, visit www.millionairesplanet.com

Giuliani Says Mosque 'Divisive'

The Wall Street Journal ^ | 08-20-10 | MICHAEL HOWARD SAUL

Posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:09:39 AM by GOP_Lady

Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani is characterizing the proposed mosque and Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero as "divisive," saying Thursday that the organizers' plans are breeding hate rather than healing wounds.

"All this is doing is creating more division, more anger, more hatred," Mr. Giuliani said during an interview on NBC's "Today" show.

"The reality is that right now, if you are a healer, you do not go forward with this project. If you're a warrior you do," declared Mr. Giuliani, the New York official most closely associated with the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the World Trade Center.

The remarks put him squarely at odds with his successor, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the proposed mosque's most outspoken advocate.

Mr. Giuliani, a former U.S. attorney and a Republican candidate for president in 2008, said the organizers have "every right" to build the center two blocks from the site of the fallen Twin Towers.

"The question is, should they build it?" he said. "Are they displaying the sensitivity they claim by building it?"

To: GOP_Lady
He also took direct aim at the imam behind the center, Feisal Abdul Rauf, accusing him of "selling sensitivity" and questioning whether his motives are genuine.

Giuliani continues in the tradition of Republican New York City mayor Fiorello LaGuardia (1933-45). One play from LaGuardia's playbook was to find the enemy's weak spot and drive a sledgehammer into it. Giuliani does it with the faint sound of regret. It's like watching a master assassin at work with the stiletto.

The former mayor praised Democratic Gov. David Paterson for proposing to meet with the project's organizers in hopes of finding an alternative location in Lower Manhattan that would be less controversial.

Another patented LaGuardia play. Pick an enemy, praise him, put him on the spot, and separate him from the rest of his herd. Paterson now has to tap-dance his way out of Giuliani's embrace. This is a death sentence in New York City's liberal Democratic organization, where Giuliani is considered the spawn of Satan -- almost as much as the arch-devil Reagan.

It's fun watching the pros at work.
14 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:29:57 AM by Publius (Unless the Constitution is followed, it is simply a piece of paper.)

Daisy Khan: "When will Muslims be accepted?"

Daisy Khan, along with her husband Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, is one of the co-founders of Cordoba House, which has proposed to build a mosque more than two blocks from Ground Zero, causing a political and religious furor.

She says she and her husband will not back down. "There is too much at stake," she says. "Constitutional rights, the development of the Muslims here, how the world is watching the United States. We tell people America upholds religious freedom. We should not compromise those values."

Khan says that it is "evident that there is still healing that needs to happen. There are bigger issues here and it's also about how Muslims are perceived. When will Muslims be accepted as plain old Americans?"

Khan says that there are huge ramifications to closing down or being forced to relocate. "We are debating about having a healing dialogue, building bridges and this whole thing has turned into the opposite of what we have envisioned. " She says that they are now having discussions with 9/11 families. "We will have a dialogue with them. " But she says, "It is private property. To walk away without taking everything into consideration would be irresponsible.

To: Free ThinkerNY

Identify the enemy.

Engage the enemy.

Neutralize the enemy.

Maybe then, we can “dialogue”. Until then, Daisy, STFU.

6 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:15:05 AM by Frank_2001

To: Free ThinkerNY

“When will Muslims be accepted as plain old Americans?”

1) When they stop flying planes into buildings full of innocent people.

2) When they allow churches to be built in muslim countries without having to worry about christians being attacked by the police, of all people.

3) When they stop stoning women and beating them raw for horrid crimes like going to school.

4) When they stop trying to make us accept women in our countries covered in black bags.

I got more, Daisy. In the meantime, get back to me when you make real progress on the first four.

8 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:15:34 AM by I still care (I believe in the universality of freedom -George Bush, asked if he regrets going to war.)

To: Free ThinkerNY
Daisy Khan: "When will Muslims be accepted?"

When they stop trying killing everyone else....


14 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:17:53 AM by darkwing104 (Lets get dangerous)

To: Free ThinkerNY

I thought Muslims believed it was wrong to mingle with non-Muslims? How are they going to welcome all kinds of people to their community center, and square it with their religion?

15 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:17:57 AM by SuziQ

To: I still care
5.) When they stop demanding special privileges whereever they live or travel.
17 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:19:09 AM by oyez (The difference in genius and stupidity is that genius has limits.)

To: Free ThinkerNY

When you abandon sharia law and submit to Constitutional rule of law, my dear.

Islam is not the supreme law in the United States. The Constitution is.

That’s what “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .” means.

The exercise of your religion is not supreme in this land. The Constitution is.

If there is no room in your religion for this concept, then there is no room in the United States of America for your religion. Sorry if that sounds a bit intolerant, but the fact is that the First Amendment expresses the exact OPPOSITE of intolerance. Our forefathers had ample experience with religious intolerance themselves before the founding of this country. That’s why the First Amendment begins the way it does.

Religion is between you and God (or Allah, or whatever.) The government may not in any way enforce religious law in this country. Sharia law is utterly incompatible with the Constitution.

And if you want to argue that point . . . that’s what the Second Amendment is for.

19 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:20:41 AM by filbert (More filbert at http://www.medary.com--The Revolution Will Be Exit-Polled.)

To: jimbo123

Islam will be “accepted” when Saudi Arabia (and other “Islamic” nations) allow Christians to safely proselytize, worship, and build Christian Churches in their countries and Muslims to safely convert to other religions.

Until then, consider the “UnWelcome” mat to be out.

23 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:22:03 AM by Little Ray (The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!)

To: Free ThinkerNY
"There is too much at stake," she says. "Constitutional rights, the development of the Muslims here, how the world is watching the United States. We tell people America upholds religious freedom. We should not compromise those values."


Can anyone spell S-H-A-R-I-A?
25 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:22:49 AM by Deo volente (God willing, America will survive this Obamination.)

To: Free ThinkerNY
Islam is completely incompatible with 2500 years of Western Civilization from Athens to Jerusalem, from Rome to Aachen, from New York to St. Petersburg.

Keep to your sandbox and you won't have any problems. Pull this s____ outside the sandbox expect to by smacked around some.
33 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:27:01 AM by Oratam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Free ThinkerNY
Muslims will be accepted when a) they fully and unconditionally renounce the goal of imposing Sharia on anyone who does voluntarily accept it, and b) they fully and unconditionally accept that all persons have the right liberty—the right to do whatever does not violate the reciprocally-respected rights of others.

Unfortunately, satisfying either one of those conditions requires that they abrogate certain fundamental commands of the Quran.
34 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:27:08 AM by sourcery (Obama is so conceited, he probably thinks that the 'Zero' in 'Ground Zero' refers to him!)

To: Free ThinkerNY

They are accepted today. In predominantly Muslim nations, they are well respected.

Christians should have a right to a nation where they are well respected too.

Muslim people who wish to be devout, should stay where the Muslim customs are revered.

They should not be able to come to predominant Christian nations and demand Christianity make concessions concerning faith.

If they could, then there won’t be one Christian nation by 2050. Muslim nations not giving an inch, we’re not about to make them tolerant to Christianity.

We must remain separate if we are to survive this. Sorry it has to be that way, but then it’s not my choice to destroy Islam world-wide. It is Islam’s choice to destroy Christianity world-wide.

35 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:27:18 AM by DoughtyOne (UniTea! It's not Rs vs Ds you dimwits. It's Cs vs Ls. Cut the crap & lets build for success.)

To: Grizzled Bear; All

Religion, my aging are.

Islam is a cult that demands total state control of everyone’s life and choices.

Why do they get away with telling us it is a “religion”. Please write, call, and visit your congress critters, and demand to know why they are accepting this political system as a “peaceful religion”.

It isn’t peaceful, and it certainly isn’t a religion.

40 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:29:50 AM by jacquej

When will Muslims be accepted as plain old Americans?

I'm sorry Daisy - it isn't you - its your book which you are claiming as the fount of your faith. This book (the koran and the hadith) says that the islamic method of evangelism is by the sword. The non-islamic world has 3 choices: convert to islam; or be enslaved; or die. This book preaches the doctrine of satan - not the Word of a Holy God...

So none of us have a problem with the typical non-believing Muslim who just clings to the few 'good verses' (the ones the koran ripped out of the Bible), and who is just trying to get along. But there is a fundamental problem with a 'movement' based on a book that exhorts the parasite to kill its host - and provides an outline on how to do it (including all the variations of 'taqiya'). As a consequence, you never know if the 'good' Muslim is really OK - or in 'hibernation' waiting for his inner jihadist to be released as he becomes 'religious'...
And you can never know.
41 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:30:18 AM by El Cid (Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house...)

To: y'all
When you have a thirteen story Catholic Credential in mecca and medina...

When you have a thirteen story Methodist Church in mecca and medina...

When you have a thirteen story Buddhist Temple in mecca and medina...

When you have a thirteen story Presbyterian Churches in mecca and medina...

When you have a thirteen story Jewish Temple in mecca and medina.

Need I go on? 8!tc]-[...

???????????????????????????????????
43 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:30:44 AM by OnTheDress (Live and let live; is not working...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Free ThinkerNY

When the Saudis allow churches and synagogues in Mecca, then we’ll talk.

44 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:31:28 AM by dfwgator

To: Free ThinkerNY

Muslims like to talk about how non-Muslims took “Muslim lands.” So, I’d say they can be accepted when they return Egypt, Syria, and Constantinople to the Christians.

46 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:32:07 AM by paudio (She wanted to be known as another Jackie O. Instead, people see her another Marie Antoinette)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Free ThinkerNY

Boy, Daisy is REALLY good with the talking points!
And I love the little thing about there not being all that much interest in the Muslim countries her husband is visiting......I guess that’s supposed to jumpstart the idea that the American taxpayer is going to foot the bill for Cordoba House. Just because we like to do ‘the right thing’, of course. How stupid do these people think we are, to even take this crap they spew seriously?

47 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:33:25 AM by supremedoctrine ("Every election is like an advance auction sale of stolen goods"--H.L.Mencken)

To: Frank_2001

Most people do not recognize that what happens in a mosque is sedition. Pure and simple. Islam is not just a “religion”, it is a cult. Larger than that though, it is a political system, it is it’s own government, its judicial...is in its sharia, and its military (jihadis) all rolled into one with one intent ...and that is to rule wherever they take root. It is a invasive, systemic infection looking to take over the host once it has quantum.

This is not just a “religion”, but something that cloaks itself in those terms so it should not be given the same treatment contemplated under the first amendment. The Korans Sharia rules are to consume whatever government there is wherever it goes.
It is political, and it’s goal is to supplant and replace.

The sooner America learns this , the better.

Obama? Obama and Company? Should be tried for treason in this issue for promoting the establishment of a foreign government on our soils. He is doing nothing to protect America as per his oath. Also, as a Muslim, he knows this, he know far better, he knows sharia, but is looking to deceive America.

For all interested...Wanna learn more?

http://thehayride.com/2010/08/louisiana-at-leading-edge-in-fight-against-shariah/#more-5392

and this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib9rofXQl6w&feature=player_embedded

Lets keep America, America!

Obama? Obama and Company? Should be tried for treason in this issue for promoting the establishment of a foreign government on our soils. As a Muslim, he knows this, he knows sharia, but is looking to deceive America.

50 posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:35:13 AM by himno hero

Norwegian traders charged with manipulation

The Financial Times ^ | 8/19/2010 | Andrew Ward in Stockholm

Posted on Friday, August 20, 2010 11:33:51 AM by bruinbirdman

Two Norwegian day traders who apparently outwitted the electronic trading systems of a US broker have sparked a debate in the country over the growing influence of machines in financial markets.

The two men have been indicted in Norway on charges of market manipulation after allegedly tricking the electronic trading system of a big US broker into raising the price of shares on the Oslo Stock Exchange.

Many people in Norway have voiced admiration for the defendants and their apparent victory for man over machine.

Svend Egil Larsen and Peder Veiby could face up to six years in jail if found guilty of manipulating the trading system of Timber Hill, a unit of US-based Interactive Brokers, to artificially inflate share prices.

Norwegian police said the men had worked out a pattern of trading that caused the system to jack up prices, allowing them to sell at a profit.

Mr Larsen and Mr Veiby could not be reached by the Financial Times for comment but Mr Larsen told Norway’s Dagens Naeringsliv newspaper that he had not intentionally “tried to trick the robot”.

But he said that, in the course of his regular day trading, it became “fairly obvious” how the system behaved.

Many small investors have leapt to the defence of the accused men, lauding them for striking a blow against the automatic trading software that increasingly dominates global financial markets.

“Robots are designed to push the market, but when someone pushes the robots, it is suddenly a criminal offence,” wrote one commentator on the Dagens Naeringsliv internet forum.

The case comes amid increasing global scrutiny of automated trading systems after the so-called “flash crash” in May when a barrage of algorithmic sell orders caused US stocks to plunge.

Christian Stenberg, the Norwegian police attorney responsible for the case, said any admiration for the accused men was misplaced.

“This is a new kind of manipulation but it is still at the expense of other investors in the market,” he said.

The case involves 2,200 trades in three Norwegian industrial stocks on the relatively sleepy Oslo bourse between 2007 and 2008.

Irregular trading patterns were spotted by the stock exchange and referred to Norway’s financial regulator, which brought in the police.

Mr Veiby is alleged to have made about NKr250,000 ($46,000) from the alleged scam and Mr Larson NKr160,000.

Interactive Brokers did not respond to calls for comment.

Total ban fails to stop Chinese gun trade

* August 18th, 2010 8:39 am

"A clandestine market for unregistered weapons still exists despite crackdown," reporter Hu Yinan of China Daily informs us.

Illegal traders advertise with graffiti on walls, despite China's near total ban on private gun ownership. To what effect has the black market succeeded?

"In 2007, a study by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies estimated the total number of guns held by civilians in China at 40 million, third only to the United States and India."

The government, of course, disputes this. In truth, they don't know. No one does.

But despite seizures and destruction of confiscated firearms, the trade continues. It's too profitable not to, despite severe penalties for those caught in violation of Chinese citizen disarmament laws.

From a 2007 China Daily report by Zhu Zhe:

"High profits are deemed the biggest attraction for people who trade illegal guns, although those found guilty of selling guns or explosives face punishment ranging from three years in jail to the death penalty."

Welcome to Sarah Brady Paradise. China has every law--and then some--advocated by our domestic gun grabbers, and I'm talking pre-Heller/McDonald, when they were still going for total bans, as opposed to the so-called "reasonable common sense restrictions" they say they'll settle for, at least until a 5 to 4 Supreme Court ratio for an individual right shifts in their direction.

The photo of the task force officer examining a handmade pistol in "Writing on the Wall for Guns" says it all. As does this admission:

"'In two to three days, these gun traders make more money than we do in a month,' joked a gun taskforce member who did not want to be identified."

The paradox and unintended consequence for the gun banners is, the more they make owning a gun difficult, the more innovative and unregulated the market becomes. They create conditions where the real world outcome is exactly the opposite of what they say they want.

There's a lesson in there somewhere for all of us, and it's about a lot more than just guns.

------------

Speaking of McDonald...

The same day that decision took place, my editor at GUNS Magazine told me he could replace my scheduled "Rights Watch" column with a summary of the case if I could turn something out quickly. While magazines are generally poor places to report news due to the layout/publishing/distribution lag between article submission and the time they hit the stands, the story was too important not to cover.

The October 2010 issue is now out, and my column "Second Amendment Ruled Applicable To States" is in it.

Click here to read it. And click here to read other features, including a complete digital edition of this issue.