Friday, February 24, 2012
NSA Stirs Concerns of Anonymous' Future Plans
I read several articles regarding this situation, but I think that this one from The Atlantic summarized it the best. Basically the director of the National Security Agency, Keith Alexander, is trying to convince our government that Anonymous has the ability to and will hack into power grids and shut them down in attempts to gain power. This story has red herring written all over it. Those of us who have followed the Anonymous saga know that they only work towards sending political messages to those who attempt to limit or obstruct our freedom. They never do anything that would adversely affect regular citizens; such as shutting off their power. We even have further evidence of this tall tale by the postings on the web after this story surfaced. According to a post on the Anonymous-affiliated Twitter account, @YourAnonNews, Anonymous wrote "NSA head engages in alarmist rhetoric & fear-mongering" and "why would Anons take out power grids when lives depend on them?" These statements are posted on a known media source that Anonymous uses to communicate with the rest of the world and they do coincide with the general ideals of the Anonymous movement. I have to agree with these comments as well as The Atlantic when I say that this type of defamation of character falls right in line with what our government told us about Iraq after 9/11 and what we're being told about China right now. We were driven to reaction from the creation of fear after 9/11. We gave the federal government so much power because we wanted to be protected from the "terrorists". Now that the people are using the tools of modern free speech to work together and have an impact on the world, government leaders are once again trying to create a sense of fear into the public to get us to, once again, give them more authority over the freedoms that we have. I am not buying it! With all of the "piracy" acts and the "privacy" acts going on, I think our government is going to try to slip a slick one in somewhere and end up getting the ability to monitor and control our online lives. The cyber realm is a new frontier and it appears that politicians are vigorously fighting for the ability to control and dictate it...thanks to groups like Anonymous, the rest of us are being made aware of this and are willing to vote based on these actions. The bottom line is that Anonymous has done nothing that promotes violence, nothing that disrupts the typical person's day, and has gone out of their way to protect those whose rights have been violated by local police officers abusing their power. These scare tactics have been a part of politics since before I was born and probably a great deal longer.
Human Trafficking
My co-worker and I were made aware of this link at truckersagainsttrafficking.com which shows a video discussing the problem of the exploitation of young girls throughout the country. When I think of the term human trafficking, I tend to think of countries in third world status or countries going through political hardships. This video opened my eyes to the fact that sex-slavery is a huge underground business taking place at truck stops on highways that you and I drive on. According to this report, young girls are abducted on a regular basis in the U.S. and are physically forced into a life of prostitution. The most disturbing thing about this is that so many people see these acts taking place and do not contact authorities. One of the biggest benefits of the technology age is the quick access to information that used to take weeks or even months to discover. By watching this video I am more aware of this issue and I know what I need to do if I see anything like this going on in this area.
When people see prostitutes on the streets or even at a truck stop, the first thought is where did that girl go wrong. We tend to believe that these girls have made these choices for themselves on their own accord. The reality is that so many girls are forced into this way of life through different forms of abuse. Some are physically beaten and threatened to encourage them to sell themselves. Others are injected with drugs that lead to physical dependance and are rewarded with a fix if they do these nasty deeds. Even more are psychologically held prisoner, either they are protecting someone else or they become completely brainwashed into thinking that they are making the right choice. In reality, all of them have been forced into modern day slavery which is unacceptable.
I am relatively new to this area and I find it interesting that Joplin has these extremely busy truck stops right off of I-44. What is it that attracts the truckers? Is it drugs? Is it prostitution? Or is it just convenient? I find it hard to believe that this many trucks stop here for mere convenience, but I do not have any evidence to explain any other reason. Based on stories I have read and heard regarding this issue, it seems that many have known about and even witnessed these actions and have not done anything to help these young victims. The Rapha House on Main St. in Joplin was founded by a local man by the name of Joe Garman and his daughter, Stephanie. Joe witnessed a girl being sold into slavery in Cambodia and acted on it. He prevented her from living a life of suffering and helped ensure the safety of her siblings as well. Now the Rapha House has several safe houses in Asia and helps many girls escape this tortuous life. The thing that bothers me is why don't people take more of an active role right here in our own country?
With the help of the internet, I have been made more aware of these situations that are occurring around us. I am willing to look for the warning signs and to report them to the appropriate authorities in an attempt to free these girls and hopefully give them an opportunity to live fulfilling lives. I have been able to see the effects of organizations like Children of the Night who are helping these girls right now as I write this post. These organizations don't only free these girls, they also help them achieve higher learning and provide counseling that will help them adapt back into the real world. These services help ensure a bright and successful future to those who couldn't have dreamed about this life before.
As a father of a daughter, I hope that you all look for these kinds of activities and report them as soon as you realize what is going on. So many organizations are out there to help these girls escape slavery and go on to lead productive, meaningful lives in our society.
When people see prostitutes on the streets or even at a truck stop, the first thought is where did that girl go wrong. We tend to believe that these girls have made these choices for themselves on their own accord. The reality is that so many girls are forced into this way of life through different forms of abuse. Some are physically beaten and threatened to encourage them to sell themselves. Others are injected with drugs that lead to physical dependance and are rewarded with a fix if they do these nasty deeds. Even more are psychologically held prisoner, either they are protecting someone else or they become completely brainwashed into thinking that they are making the right choice. In reality, all of them have been forced into modern day slavery which is unacceptable.
I am relatively new to this area and I find it interesting that Joplin has these extremely busy truck stops right off of I-44. What is it that attracts the truckers? Is it drugs? Is it prostitution? Or is it just convenient? I find it hard to believe that this many trucks stop here for mere convenience, but I do not have any evidence to explain any other reason. Based on stories I have read and heard regarding this issue, it seems that many have known about and even witnessed these actions and have not done anything to help these young victims. The Rapha House on Main St. in Joplin was founded by a local man by the name of Joe Garman and his daughter, Stephanie. Joe witnessed a girl being sold into slavery in Cambodia and acted on it. He prevented her from living a life of suffering and helped ensure the safety of her siblings as well. Now the Rapha House has several safe houses in Asia and helps many girls escape this tortuous life. The thing that bothers me is why don't people take more of an active role right here in our own country?
With the help of the internet, I have been made more aware of these situations that are occurring around us. I am willing to look for the warning signs and to report them to the appropriate authorities in an attempt to free these girls and hopefully give them an opportunity to live fulfilling lives. I have been able to see the effects of organizations like Children of the Night who are helping these girls right now as I write this post. These organizations don't only free these girls, they also help them achieve higher learning and provide counseling that will help them adapt back into the real world. These services help ensure a bright and successful future to those who couldn't have dreamed about this life before.
As a father of a daughter, I hope that you all look for these kinds of activities and report them as soon as you realize what is going on. So many organizations are out there to help these girls escape slavery and go on to lead productive, meaningful lives in our society.
Friday, February 17, 2012
President Obama Plans Disarm More Nukes
According to the Associated Press, the president is working on a planned negotiation to reduce the amount of deployed nuclear arms held by the U.S. and Russia. The amount of nuclear weapons to be disarmed is even higher than the originally planned reduction set forth in a 2002 treaty between the two nations, according to an article on npr.org. The originally negotiated amount of nuclear warheads for deployment by either nation was listed on page three of the New Smart Treaty as 1,550 per nation. However, it has been a main area of focus of President Obama to lower this number by even more. According to an article on armytimes.com, the new proposition could lower the number of U.S. warheads by as much as 80% of the original agreed amount. This could mean that we would only have as many as 300 active nukes in our possession. Even though it would seem that 300 nuclear bombs should be more than enough to protect our interests, many Republicans are against this move. They feel that it would jeopardize our abilities to shield our allies, such as, Japan and Turkey. They also believe that this drastic of a reduction could complicate things with unstable countries such as Pakistan and Iran. The other major concern is that Russia most likely would not make this same commitment. The main reason many are backing this reduction is the belief that our modern threats of terrorism cannot be fought with thousands of nuclear bombs, which is true, but the same countries that are threatening us with terrorism are gaining access to the tools and the information needed to build nuclear weapons, which means that we have more risks of nuclear attacks from more countries then ever before.
I agree that the U.S. should set an example of global protection by reducing our nuclear stockpile. This would give us more credibility when negotiating with nations like Iran and trying to limit their resources in developing weapons, but if we are going to make such major reductions, we need to have commitments from other nations like Russia and China. If we take these measures into our own hands, we will be giving up our biggest edge in global warfare. Without at least Russia's commitment, we could be burned by this in the fairly short future. There has already been much speculation of countries like Iran getting nuclear resources from Russia and other former Soviet states. We do not know how stable the Russian government will be in the decades to come nor do we know who their future allies will be. Making this large of a reduction seems to have much more risk than benefit.
Ultimately I see this measure being discussed and hopefully voted on by Congress. If this is the case, then I do not see it happening. The other thing to consider is that this is definitely another campaign driven agenda for Obama. If he is not reelected then I also do not see this discussion going any further than just discussion. However, if reelected this could become a reality. I think that the previously negotiated reductions should be just fine for now. We need to see how things develop in the east before making any other drastic changes. With new governments emerging and the political unrest that comes with them, it is too hard to predict who our friends and enemies will be. Until then, we need all the weapons we have just in case.
I agree that the U.S. should set an example of global protection by reducing our nuclear stockpile. This would give us more credibility when negotiating with nations like Iran and trying to limit their resources in developing weapons, but if we are going to make such major reductions, we need to have commitments from other nations like Russia and China. If we take these measures into our own hands, we will be giving up our biggest edge in global warfare. Without at least Russia's commitment, we could be burned by this in the fairly short future. There has already been much speculation of countries like Iran getting nuclear resources from Russia and other former Soviet states. We do not know how stable the Russian government will be in the decades to come nor do we know who their future allies will be. Making this large of a reduction seems to have much more risk than benefit.
Ultimately I see this measure being discussed and hopefully voted on by Congress. If this is the case, then I do not see it happening. The other thing to consider is that this is definitely another campaign driven agenda for Obama. If he is not reelected then I also do not see this discussion going any further than just discussion. However, if reelected this could become a reality. I think that the previously negotiated reductions should be just fine for now. We need to see how things develop in the east before making any other drastic changes. With new governments emerging and the political unrest that comes with them, it is too hard to predict who our friends and enemies will be. Until then, we need all the weapons we have just in case.
Parents Guilty of Manslaughter of Their 8-Year-Old Son
I read this article on foxnews and it was disturbing on many levels. Monica Hussing and William Robinson, parents of eight year old Willie Jr., plead guilty in an Ohio court to involuntary manslaughter of their son. Willie Jr. suffered from Hodgkin lymphoma and eventually died from it. The reason his parents were brought to court was because it would appear that they were negligent in seeking care for their son when he became ill. The couple did not have health insurance and claim that they could not afford to pay for checkups, let alone cancer treatment.
As a parent, I couldn't imagine denying my son medical attention if he became ill. The way that this article was written, it tried to make it appear as if these parents did just this, however, according to their daughter, they did seek help from social services and other non-profit organizations to try to get an evaluation of their son's condition, but were unable to get help that they could afford. I have had a difficult time finding affordable health insurance since moving to Joplin, but I continued looking until I found it. I have to put my children's well-being ahead of anything else. Health insurance is my third highest expense after my home and food (basic necessities of survival). Even though it seems that these parents did try to find someone to help them, the article goes on to mention how they turned down an offer to evaluate their son for $180. At about the same time, they did, however, find a way to pay $87 for a dog to get a flea treatment. This statement, along with the fact that the parents did not have any kind of insurance for their kids, leads me to believe that they were indeed guilty of manslaughter. They obviously did not have their priorities straight.
Even if I use this logic to justify the sentencing of the parents to prison for eight years, I know that there is still something else wrong with this picture. Millions of parents are not able to afford medical insurance for their kids in this country. Priorities might play a role in many of these families' inability to get insurance, but it has also become acceptable among Americans to not purchase insurance. Another issue is what will happen to this couple's other kids? They will become wards of the state and be forced into foster homes. Unfortunately this article doesn't go into enough detail about the kind of home these parents were providing, but I would hope that it would have been better than being raised as a foster child. I think that this shows that something needs to be done to the sky-rocketing insurance costs in this country. I know that medical treatments are expensive, but the amounts that are being billed to insurance companies are overly inflated. If there is a way to find a middle ground, I would be all for it. If we don't seek ways to improve our health care problems, more children like Willie Jr. will perish.
As a parent, I couldn't imagine denying my son medical attention if he became ill. The way that this article was written, it tried to make it appear as if these parents did just this, however, according to their daughter, they did seek help from social services and other non-profit organizations to try to get an evaluation of their son's condition, but were unable to get help that they could afford. I have had a difficult time finding affordable health insurance since moving to Joplin, but I continued looking until I found it. I have to put my children's well-being ahead of anything else. Health insurance is my third highest expense after my home and food (basic necessities of survival). Even though it seems that these parents did try to find someone to help them, the article goes on to mention how they turned down an offer to evaluate their son for $180. At about the same time, they did, however, find a way to pay $87 for a dog to get a flea treatment. This statement, along with the fact that the parents did not have any kind of insurance for their kids, leads me to believe that they were indeed guilty of manslaughter. They obviously did not have their priorities straight.
Even if I use this logic to justify the sentencing of the parents to prison for eight years, I know that there is still something else wrong with this picture. Millions of parents are not able to afford medical insurance for their kids in this country. Priorities might play a role in many of these families' inability to get insurance, but it has also become acceptable among Americans to not purchase insurance. Another issue is what will happen to this couple's other kids? They will become wards of the state and be forced into foster homes. Unfortunately this article doesn't go into enough detail about the kind of home these parents were providing, but I would hope that it would have been better than being raised as a foster child. I think that this shows that something needs to be done to the sky-rocketing insurance costs in this country. I know that medical treatments are expensive, but the amounts that are being billed to insurance companies are overly inflated. If there is a way to find a middle ground, I would be all for it. If we don't seek ways to improve our health care problems, more children like Willie Jr. will perish.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Well, Well, Well....Komen Reverses It's Decision
After I wrote about the politically driven decision by the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation to withdraw grant funding to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening, I then found this article on yahoo saying that the organization has reversed its decision. Komen issued a public statement saying "We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women's lives". I am glad to see that in the information age, the people of this country, and the people of our communities came together and displayed a disagreement with the new policies set forth by the Komen foundation.
According to several web postings, including this one on lifenews.com, the Komen website was flooded with complaints regarding their initial decision and was even "hacked". According to the stories, the banner on the original website read "Help us get 26.2 or 13.1 miles closer to a world without breast cancer", but was changed by an unknown hacker to read "Help us run over poor women on our way to the bank.” I completely agree with this hacker's thought process. I understand the complexity regarding the issue of abortion, but this was definitely the wrong way to address it. Denying women with low income the ability to get screened for breast cancer is inhumane. If you read my first post regarding this matter, you would know that my stand on abortion is in the hands of the voters. If it is legal, then it is legal and there is nothing anyone can do about it, but if legislature is changed through the appropriate democratic processes, then Planned Parenthood would have to dismiss this procedure from it's list of services.
The biggest thing that bothers me with the issue of abortion is the people who are so firmly against it are completely unaffected by any person's decision to have an abortion. If I were going to spend my entire life fighting for something, it would be for something that betters my life or the future lives of my descendants. Abortions do not affect anyone other then the mother of the unborn child. The belief that unborn fetuses are alive and they should not be aborted is one of personal nature, it is not one that should be forced on everyone. If the reason one believes in this ideal is religion, then it can be easily compared to the basis this country was founded on; we all have the freedom to choose what we believe and no one has the right to force their beliefs on another, especially when the decisions made by one have no effect on others.
I am truly happy to see that this new global environment has exposed this issue and has forced this organization to honor its obligations and provide an opportunity for less fortunate people to receive the minimal, humane treatments that we all deserve. If you are against abortion, then you have to face the fact that in order to prevent it, you will need the majority of the population to agree with you. If more people disagree with you then those who agree, then you have to deal with it, this is a democracy, not a dictatorship.
According to several web postings, including this one on lifenews.com, the Komen website was flooded with complaints regarding their initial decision and was even "hacked". According to the stories, the banner on the original website read "Help us get 26.2 or 13.1 miles closer to a world without breast cancer", but was changed by an unknown hacker to read "Help us run over poor women on our way to the bank.” I completely agree with this hacker's thought process. I understand the complexity regarding the issue of abortion, but this was definitely the wrong way to address it. Denying women with low income the ability to get screened for breast cancer is inhumane. If you read my first post regarding this matter, you would know that my stand on abortion is in the hands of the voters. If it is legal, then it is legal and there is nothing anyone can do about it, but if legislature is changed through the appropriate democratic processes, then Planned Parenthood would have to dismiss this procedure from it's list of services.
The biggest thing that bothers me with the issue of abortion is the people who are so firmly against it are completely unaffected by any person's decision to have an abortion. If I were going to spend my entire life fighting for something, it would be for something that betters my life or the future lives of my descendants. Abortions do not affect anyone other then the mother of the unborn child. The belief that unborn fetuses are alive and they should not be aborted is one of personal nature, it is not one that should be forced on everyone. If the reason one believes in this ideal is religion, then it can be easily compared to the basis this country was founded on; we all have the freedom to choose what we believe and no one has the right to force their beliefs on another, especially when the decisions made by one have no effect on others.
I am truly happy to see that this new global environment has exposed this issue and has forced this organization to honor its obligations and provide an opportunity for less fortunate people to receive the minimal, humane treatments that we all deserve. If you are against abortion, then you have to face the fact that in order to prevent it, you will need the majority of the population to agree with you. If more people disagree with you then those who agree, then you have to deal with it, this is a democracy, not a dictatorship.
Attack on Planned Parenthood Based on Politics
I first read about this story on washingtonpost.com. The Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation, the leading breast cancer advocacy group in the U.S., announced that they will no longer provide grant funds to Planned Parenthood. The amount that was originally expected to be donated was $680,000. This would have given the non-profit, affordable health care provider a major blow that could have prevented many women from being able to receive much needed mammograms. However, in the end, this did not happen. After the word got out that Planned Parenthood was being attacked based on political beliefs surrounding it's involvement in providing more abortions nationally than any other provider, thousands of individuals made donations totaling over $500,000. I understand the concerns people have regarding abortions, but this is part of living in a democratic society. Planned Parenthood does not perform illegal abortions. Those who choose to have them are entitled to that choice (at least for now). Until legislation is passed banning abortions in all states, people will continue to choose to have them. Abortions are not the real issue here. The real issue is the attempt to strip the ability for thousands of women to be tested for breast cancer away. The longer breast cancer goes undetected, the chances of survival diminish.
According to another article I read regarding this issue on investors.com, Planned Parenthood has already had to fight for the federal funding that they have been receiving for years. The article goes on to say that because of the abortions being performed, many tax payers do not want their tax dollars funding their operations. In an attempt to shut Planned Parenthood down, Americans United for Life President Charmaine Yoest submitted a report that launched an investigation by the Energy and Commerce Committee, but Planned Parenthood has not violated any policies. When Yoest heard about Komen's decision to cut funds, she replied by saying "I was always troubled with this whole idea that the nation’s largest abortion provider was enmeshed in the breast cancer fight when they weren’t actually doing mammograms". However, if you check out plannedparenthood.org, you will see that they do provide breast cancer screenings and mammograms along with many other valuable services other than abortions.
The main reason I support Planned Parenthood is that they provide quality care while helping those without health insurance or who have minimal income. Without a health care provider like this, many people would be forced to go without vaccinations, blood tests, physicals, cancer screenings, and many other essential services. If and when abortions are illegal, then Planned Parenthood will have to stop performing them. The right way to approach this political issue is through the legal systems of the states, not by sanctioning a non-profit organization that provides life-saving services to the communities we live in.
According to another article I read regarding this issue on investors.com, Planned Parenthood has already had to fight for the federal funding that they have been receiving for years. The article goes on to say that because of the abortions being performed, many tax payers do not want their tax dollars funding their operations. In an attempt to shut Planned Parenthood down, Americans United for Life President Charmaine Yoest submitted a report that launched an investigation by the Energy and Commerce Committee, but Planned Parenthood has not violated any policies. When Yoest heard about Komen's decision to cut funds, she replied by saying "I was always troubled with this whole idea that the nation’s largest abortion provider was enmeshed in the breast cancer fight when they weren’t actually doing mammograms". However, if you check out plannedparenthood.org, you will see that they do provide breast cancer screenings and mammograms along with many other valuable services other than abortions.
The main reason I support Planned Parenthood is that they provide quality care while helping those without health insurance or who have minimal income. Without a health care provider like this, many people would be forced to go without vaccinations, blood tests, physicals, cancer screenings, and many other essential services. If and when abortions are illegal, then Planned Parenthood will have to stop performing them. The right way to approach this political issue is through the legal systems of the states, not by sanctioning a non-profit organization that provides life-saving services to the communities we live in.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)