Flickr
This is a test post from 
, a fancy photo sharing thing.
, a fancy photo sharing thing.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Saturday, February 03, 2007
Exxon Mobil nets largest annual profit in U.S. history
wow really?? what a surprise!
Feb. 1, 2007, 10:34AM
Exxon Mobil nets largest annual profit in U.S. history
By KRISTEN HAYS
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
TOOLS
Email Get section feed
Print Subscribe NOW
RESOURCES
More oil
Chart changes in today's oil price Exxon Mobil Corp. roared past Wall Street expectations and set a new record for the highest profit ever earned by a U.S. company in a single year.
Exxon said today the company's 2006 profits reached $39.5 billion, trumping its own 2005 record of $36.1 billion. Excluding a $410 million tax benefit, annual profits reached $39 billion — still nearly $2 billion higher than the $37.1 billion analysts expected.
Per-share earnings for the year reached $6.62, or $6.55 excluding the tax benefit. Either way, Exxon beat the $6.36 per-share expected by analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial.
Results came after a volatile year of oil prices and natural gas prices. Oil reached a summit of $77 a barrel in July, but ended the year at $61 a barrel. And natural gas prices fell throughout 2006 to half of a December 2005 high of $15 per million British thermal units.
So Exxon's quarterly results fell 4 percent compared to the fourth quarter of 2005, but still exceeded $10 billion and surpassed analyst expectations.
For the fourth quarter, Exxon earned $10.25 billion, or $1.75 per share, compared to $10.7 billion, or $1.71 per share in the year-ago period. Excluding the tax benefit, quarterly earnings were $9.8 billion, or $1.69 per share, down 5 percent from $10.3 billion, or $1.65 per share, in the fourth quarter of 2005.
Revenue for the quarter was $90 billion, down from $99.3 billion in the October-December period of 2005. Annual revenue was $377.6 billion, up from $370.6 billion in 2005.
Royal Dutch Shell, the world's second-largest oil company behind Exxon, and Marathon Oil Corp. also reported results today.
The Hague-based Royal Dutch Shell earned $5.28 billion in the quarter, a 21 percent jump over $4.39 billion in the fourth quarter of 2005. Full-year earnings were $25.4 billion, a 1 percent rise over $25.3 billion in 2005.
And Marathon earned $1.08 billion, or $3.06 per share, a 17 percent drop from $1.26 billion, or $3.43 per share in the fourth quarter of 2005. Excluding one-time items, Marathon earned $838 million, or $2.38 per share, compared to $1.33 billion, or $3.61 per share in the year-ago period.
Either way, Marathon exceeded Wall Street expectations. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial expected earnings of $2.26 per share for the quarter.
For the year, Marathon earned $5.2 billion, or $14.50 per share, up from $3 billion or $8.44 per share in 2005.
Quarterly revenue was $14 billion compared to $17.2 billion in the year-ago period. Revenue for the year was $65.4 billion compared to $63.3 billion.
While the three integrated oil companies largely overcame rising industry costs, Houston-based independent oil and gas producer Apache Corp.'s results felt the sting from that and lower natural gas prices.
Apache said today that the company's 2006 earnings reached $2.55 billion, or $7.64 per share, compared to its 2005 record of $2.62 billion, or $7.84 per share. But proved reserves rose 9 percent to $2.3 billion barrels of oil equivalent.
Lower natural gas prices pushed Apache's quarterly earnings to $519 million, or $1.56 per share, from $787 million or $2.35 in the year-ago period. Analysts expected earnings of $1.60 per share.
Feb. 1, 2007, 10:34AM
Exxon Mobil nets largest annual profit in U.S. history
By KRISTEN HAYS
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
TOOLS
Email Get section feed
Print Subscribe NOW
RESOURCES
More oil
Chart changes in today's oil price Exxon Mobil Corp. roared past Wall Street expectations and set a new record for the highest profit ever earned by a U.S. company in a single year.
Exxon said today the company's 2006 profits reached $39.5 billion, trumping its own 2005 record of $36.1 billion. Excluding a $410 million tax benefit, annual profits reached $39 billion — still nearly $2 billion higher than the $37.1 billion analysts expected.
Per-share earnings for the year reached $6.62, or $6.55 excluding the tax benefit. Either way, Exxon beat the $6.36 per-share expected by analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial.
Results came after a volatile year of oil prices and natural gas prices. Oil reached a summit of $77 a barrel in July, but ended the year at $61 a barrel. And natural gas prices fell throughout 2006 to half of a December 2005 high of $15 per million British thermal units.
So Exxon's quarterly results fell 4 percent compared to the fourth quarter of 2005, but still exceeded $10 billion and surpassed analyst expectations.
For the fourth quarter, Exxon earned $10.25 billion, or $1.75 per share, compared to $10.7 billion, or $1.71 per share in the year-ago period. Excluding the tax benefit, quarterly earnings were $9.8 billion, or $1.69 per share, down 5 percent from $10.3 billion, or $1.65 per share, in the fourth quarter of 2005.
Revenue for the quarter was $90 billion, down from $99.3 billion in the October-December period of 2005. Annual revenue was $377.6 billion, up from $370.6 billion in 2005.
Royal Dutch Shell, the world's second-largest oil company behind Exxon, and Marathon Oil Corp. also reported results today.
The Hague-based Royal Dutch Shell earned $5.28 billion in the quarter, a 21 percent jump over $4.39 billion in the fourth quarter of 2005. Full-year earnings were $25.4 billion, a 1 percent rise over $25.3 billion in 2005.
And Marathon earned $1.08 billion, or $3.06 per share, a 17 percent drop from $1.26 billion, or $3.43 per share in the fourth quarter of 2005. Excluding one-time items, Marathon earned $838 million, or $2.38 per share, compared to $1.33 billion, or $3.61 per share in the year-ago period.
Either way, Marathon exceeded Wall Street expectations. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial expected earnings of $2.26 per share for the quarter.
For the year, Marathon earned $5.2 billion, or $14.50 per share, up from $3 billion or $8.44 per share in 2005.
Quarterly revenue was $14 billion compared to $17.2 billion in the year-ago period. Revenue for the year was $65.4 billion compared to $63.3 billion.
While the three integrated oil companies largely overcame rising industry costs, Houston-based independent oil and gas producer Apache Corp.'s results felt the sting from that and lower natural gas prices.
Apache said today that the company's 2006 earnings reached $2.55 billion, or $7.64 per share, compared to its 2005 record of $2.62 billion, or $7.84 per share. But proved reserves rose 9 percent to $2.3 billion barrels of oil equivalent.
Lower natural gas prices pushed Apache's quarterly earnings to $519 million, or $1.56 per share, from $787 million or $2.35 in the year-ago period. Analysts expected earnings of $1.60 per share.
Monday, January 29, 2007
Differential Equations
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1653360433
Monday, January 22, 2007
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Summer Break
Happy to have summer break from school. I hope to read a book for fun. One of them Great Expectations by Dickens. hmmm, do some fun stuff.
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Friday, March 24, 2006
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Thursday, December 29, 2005
The butterfly’s wing flapped in the wrong place.
The butterfly’s wing flapped in the wrong place.
I ran into this old article in Scientific American from May 2004 Article; "Bush-League Lysenkoism". Amazing how essentially mere political motives disguised as science make writers use such negatively strong associations against those in power with whom they do not agree. It amounts to ad hominy attacks. The recurring theme in my discussions is that when a thesis does not involve something as exact as 1 + 1 = 2 the argument seems to be up to whoever is loudest, in power or the majority. Anyone who is not in line with their strain of thought is automatically and condescendingly labeled as incapable of using reason and logic or ignoring the supposedly obvious facts.
This just goes to show that people really believe what they want to believe. The faith of avowed humanists is indeed strong and passionate. It’s not the two way street that it should be.
What is the two way street?
The two-way street should be to not draw conclusions when not all the facts are in. A sage once said, "The basis for all real thinking --and true scholarship-- is the ability to withhold judgment until all the facts are in". Evolutionists want to make sure the student has already formed his evolutionary ideas and he will grow up to be an evolutionist when his credentials are earned. Then they can use the credentials to continue proselytizing with the same ideas they’ve subscribed to since long before any formal education in the subject. This is just circular reasoning to think that just because something is said by a scientist then it must be scientific and reliable. Obviously not all facts will ever be “in” in the sense of a fully qualified scientific experiment but one must not fail to observe that the lack absolutely concrete proof for one thesis does not necessarily validate antithesis.
The same group also plays weatherman. Is the earth heating or cooling? Why is it heating or cooling and what will be the effect? Hasn't the earth's climate just gone through cycles before man's activities started to affect it? Somehow people find redemption and to sound environmentally responsible by pointing the finger and blaming ourselves but I think it's one of those things where is hard to tell exactly what's going on. It's a free-for-all like the turn of the financial market. The two-year Treasury yields rose above 10-year yields for the second time this week in New York. (Financial news for Dec 29th 2005, see http://www.bloomberg.com or other news source) Historically this has been a sign of recession because it shows lack of confidence in long term investments. This situation gives rise to a myriad of reasons why; first it happened as well as a similarly numerous amount of predictions about the financial market. No one is 100% wrong and no one is 100% right. Sometimes words are cheap. Words are powerful though and sometimes it is true that the pen is mightier than the sword. And the masses are swayed by every wind of doctrine; so to speak.
As the year comes to a close all claims made during the first quarter by South Korean scientists of historic breakthroughs in stem cell research have evaporated.
South Korean researcher Hwang Woo-suk resigned from his university on Friday after the school said he fabricated stem-cell research
I'm not vilifying the whole stem cell research community for the errors of one but amazing that in spite of his own admission some people still choose to believe that he actually was able to clone a dog and grow cells from patients. They choose to believe so and they do have the freedom to do so but it's not science and it does not validate any of its claims and it certainly should not influence public opinion on the subject. It reminds me of the story of the world's greatest archaeological hoax, Piltdown Man. Barkham Manor in East Sussex; around 1912, workmen digging gravel in a pit near the manor's driveway unearthed pieces of skull. Piltdown Man became an Edwardian sensation. He popularized evolution and was British, matching Germany's Neanderthal Man and France's Cro-Magnon Man. But in 1953 a new dating technique revealed the jaw to be recent: it belonged to an orang utan and had filed teeth. Of course that deception took a lot longer to be uncovered.
I think science will advance and we will find a way to cure many deceases including genetic diseases but we can't sacrifice all restraints of ethical research for the sake of accelerated gratification. It's somewhat similar to when the US was blowing up nuclear and hydrogen bombs all over the place and polluting all over the place why? The government did it because it was considered national security and also because we could do it. Scientists love science and are happy play Frankenstein if we let them. We should let the science mature.
The arguments fly back and forth between the camps sometimes hog-wild and pig-crazy. I’m confused and amused by the camp that labels itself “progressive”. What a noble name. Too bad it’s already taken. It’s like Al Gore taking credit for inventing the internet. A bunch of nerds that were still virgins at 35 labored hard a long for years to send bits and bytes across wires and then one slick dude takes all the credit. I think everyone wants progress but not the progress that has basically eliminated all previous civilizations; so called progress that is reckless and dangerous. I think scientific and social progress is achievable without fossilizing all those who opposed our views. We need to gauge the need to save the environment while not chocking the economy. We need to further medical research without desensitizing us. And we need to be honest about the things that do not have scientific proof.
Okay I totally wasted my break on ramblings.
Sunday, December 18, 2005
In Address, Bush Says He Ordered Domestic Spying - New York Times
People this is Old news. And I agree that it's necessary. I've nothing to hide anyway!
In Address, Bush Says He Ordered Domestic Spying
Manuel Balce Ceneta/Associated PressPresident Bush delivered his radio address in the Roosevelt Room. In the live address, he criticized senators who voted not to renew the antiterrorism law known as the USA Patriot Act.
Save Article
By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: December 18, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 17 - President Bush acknowledged on Saturday that he had ordered the National Security Agency to conduct an electronic eavesdropping program in the United States without first obtaining warrants, and said he would continue the highly classified program because it was "a vital tool in our war against the terrorists."
Skip to next paragraph
Transcript: President Bush's Address (December 17, 2005)
Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts (December 16, 2005)
Enlarge This Image
Manuel Balce Ceneta/Associated Press
In an unusual live radio address, President Bush defended a classified eavesdropping program.
In an unusual step, Mr. Bush delivered a live weekly radio address from the White House in which he defended his action as "fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities."
He also lashed out at senators, both Democrats and Republicans, who voted on Friday to block the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act, which expanded the president's power to conduct surveillance, with warrants, in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks.
The revelation that Mr. Bush had secretly instructed the security agency to intercept the communications of Americans and terrorist suspects inside the United States, without first obtaining warrants from a secret court that oversees intelligence matters, was cited by several senators as a reason for their vote.
"In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment," Mr. Bush said forcefully from behind a lectern in the Roosevelt Room, next to the Oval Office. The White House invited cameras in, guaranteeing television coverage.
He said the Senate's action "endangers the lives of our citizens," and added that "the terrorist threat to our country will not expire in two weeks," a reference to the approaching deadline of Dec. 31, when critical provisions of the current law will end.
His statement came just a day before he was scheduled to make a rare Oval Office address to the nation, at 9 p.m. Eastern time on Sunday, celebrating the Iraqi elections and describing what his press secretary on Saturday called the "path forward."
Mr. Bush's public confirmation on Saturday of the existence of one of the country's most secret intelligence programs, which had been known to only a select number of his aides, was a rare moment in his presidency. Few presidents have publicly confirmed the existence of heavily classified intelligence programs like this one.
His admission was reminiscent of Dwight Eisenhower's in 1960 that he had authorized U-2 flights over the Soviet Union after Francis Gary Powers was shot down on a reconnaissance mission. At the time, President Eisenhower declared that "no one wants another Pearl Harbor," an argument Mr. Bush echoed on Saturday in defending his program as a critical component of antiterrorism efforts.
But the revelation of the domestic spying program, which the administration temporarily suspended last year because of concerns about its legality, came in a leak. Mr. Bush said the information had been "improperly provided to news organizations."
As a result of the report, he said, "our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies and endangers our country."
As recently as Friday, when he was interviewed by Jim Lehrer of PBS, Mr. Bush refused to confirm the report the previous evening in The New York Times that in 2002 he authorized the spying operation by the security agency, which is usually barred from intercepting domestic communications. While not denying the report, he called it "speculation" and said he did not "talk about ongoing intelligence operations."
But as the clamor over the revelation rose and Vice President Dick Cheney and Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff, went to Capitol Hill on Friday to answer charges that the program was an illegal assumption of presidential powers, even in a time of war, Mr. Bush and his senior aides decided to abandon that approach.
"There was an interest in saying more about it, but everyone recognized its highly classified nature," one senior administration official said, speaking on background because, he said, the White House wanted the president to be the only voice on the issue. "This is directly taking on the critics. The Democrats are now in the position of supporting our efforts to protect Americans, or defend positions that could weaken our nation's security."
Democrats saw the issue differently. "Our government must follow the laws and respect the Constitution while it protects Americans' security and liberty," said Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee and the Senate's leading critic of the Patriot Act.
Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has said he would conduct hearings on why Mr. Bush took the action.
12Next
In Address, Bush Says He Ordered Domestic Spying
Manuel Balce Ceneta/Associated PressPresident Bush delivered his radio address in the Roosevelt Room. In the live address, he criticized senators who voted not to renew the antiterrorism law known as the USA Patriot Act.
Save Article
By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: December 18, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 17 - President Bush acknowledged on Saturday that he had ordered the National Security Agency to conduct an electronic eavesdropping program in the United States without first obtaining warrants, and said he would continue the highly classified program because it was "a vital tool in our war against the terrorists."
Skip to next paragraph
Transcript: President Bush's Address (December 17, 2005)
Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts (December 16, 2005)
Enlarge This Image
Manuel Balce Ceneta/Associated Press
In an unusual live radio address, President Bush defended a classified eavesdropping program.
In an unusual step, Mr. Bush delivered a live weekly radio address from the White House in which he defended his action as "fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities."
He also lashed out at senators, both Democrats and Republicans, who voted on Friday to block the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act, which expanded the president's power to conduct surveillance, with warrants, in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks.
The revelation that Mr. Bush had secretly instructed the security agency to intercept the communications of Americans and terrorist suspects inside the United States, without first obtaining warrants from a secret court that oversees intelligence matters, was cited by several senators as a reason for their vote.
"In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment," Mr. Bush said forcefully from behind a lectern in the Roosevelt Room, next to the Oval Office. The White House invited cameras in, guaranteeing television coverage.
He said the Senate's action "endangers the lives of our citizens," and added that "the terrorist threat to our country will not expire in two weeks," a reference to the approaching deadline of Dec. 31, when critical provisions of the current law will end.
His statement came just a day before he was scheduled to make a rare Oval Office address to the nation, at 9 p.m. Eastern time on Sunday, celebrating the Iraqi elections and describing what his press secretary on Saturday called the "path forward."
Mr. Bush's public confirmation on Saturday of the existence of one of the country's most secret intelligence programs, which had been known to only a select number of his aides, was a rare moment in his presidency. Few presidents have publicly confirmed the existence of heavily classified intelligence programs like this one.
His admission was reminiscent of Dwight Eisenhower's in 1960 that he had authorized U-2 flights over the Soviet Union after Francis Gary Powers was shot down on a reconnaissance mission. At the time, President Eisenhower declared that "no one wants another Pearl Harbor," an argument Mr. Bush echoed on Saturday in defending his program as a critical component of antiterrorism efforts.
But the revelation of the domestic spying program, which the administration temporarily suspended last year because of concerns about its legality, came in a leak. Mr. Bush said the information had been "improperly provided to news organizations."
As a result of the report, he said, "our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies and endangers our country."
As recently as Friday, when he was interviewed by Jim Lehrer of PBS, Mr. Bush refused to confirm the report the previous evening in The New York Times that in 2002 he authorized the spying operation by the security agency, which is usually barred from intercepting domestic communications. While not denying the report, he called it "speculation" and said he did not "talk about ongoing intelligence operations."
But as the clamor over the revelation rose and Vice President Dick Cheney and Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff, went to Capitol Hill on Friday to answer charges that the program was an illegal assumption of presidential powers, even in a time of war, Mr. Bush and his senior aides decided to abandon that approach.
"There was an interest in saying more about it, but everyone recognized its highly classified nature," one senior administration official said, speaking on background because, he said, the White House wanted the president to be the only voice on the issue. "This is directly taking on the critics. The Democrats are now in the position of supporting our efforts to protect Americans, or defend positions that could weaken our nation's security."
Democrats saw the issue differently. "Our government must follow the laws and respect the Constitution while it protects Americans' security and liberty," said Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee and the Senate's leading critic of the Patriot Act.
Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has said he would conduct hearings on why Mr. Bush took the action.
12Next
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Bloomberg.com: Germany Iran's President Dismisses Nazi Holocaust as Myth
Iran's President Dismisses Nazi Holocaust as `Myth' (Update5)
Dec. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the Nazi Holocaust a ``myth'' and said Europe, the U.S. and Canada should use their own land for a Jewish state.
The West has ``fabricated a myth under the name `Massacre of the Jews,' and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves,'' Iran's leader told thousands of supporters in the southeastern Sistan-Baluchestan province, in a speech aired live today on state television.
``If you say and insist it's true that you killed 6 million Jews in crematoria during World War II, then why should the Palestinians pay for that?'' Ahmadinejad asked, referring to Europeans. ``Our proposal is that you give a piece of your land in Europe, the U.S., Canada or Alaska. If you do that, the Iranian people will no longer protest against you.''
This is the strongest anti-Israeli public comment by Ahmadinejad since he took office in August. The Iranian president drew international condemnation on Oct. 26 after saying that Israel should be ``wiped off the map.'' On Dec. 8, he prompted another outcry when he said Europe should host Israel on its soil. Some 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis until Germany's defeat in the 1939-1945 war.
Remarks `Deliberate'
His remarks are ``deliberate'' and fulfill different aims, said Olivier Roy, a specialist on Central Asia and Islam at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique in Paris.
``First he wants to cut the grass under the feet of other elements in the regime that favor a more open stance with the U.S.,'' Roy said in a telephone interview. ``Secondly, he's a pure product of the revolution, who is just not interested in diplomacy. And finally, the situation in Iraq makes him feel in a position of strength, as an attack from the U.S. or Israel looks highly unlikely at the moment.''
The remarks by Ahmadinejad, whose election in June gave backers of the Islamic revolution full power over state institutions, have added to tensions as Iran faces possible United Nations sanctions over its nuclear program.
Talks between the European Union and Iran, aimed at ending the standoff over the nuclear program, are scheduled to resume on Dec. 21. The negotiations broke down in August after Iran resumed uranium conversion, an initial step to increase the concentration of the U-235 isotope that starts and sustains a nuclear reaction.
`Legitimate Nuclear Rights'
``Be certain that we will not back away one iota from our legitimate nuclear rights,'' Agence France-Presse quoted Ahmadinejad as saying today in Sistan-Baluchestan province.
Iran's president, like his predecessor Mohammad Khatami, has said the country has a ``legitimate right'' to develop a nuclear power program. The U.S. alleges Iran is gearing up to build a nuclear bomb.
The board of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency voted in September to refer the dispute over Iran's nuclear program to the 15-nation UN Security Council, without setting a date.
The U.S. and its European allies decided last month not to press for such referral immediately, in order to allow more time for an agreement that would permit Iran's uranium enrichment to take place in Russia.
`Extremist Regime'
``We hope the international community takes these comments about wiping Israel off the map very seriously and wakes up to the nature of this extremist regime,'' Raanan Gissin, a spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, said in a telephone interview from Jerusalem. ``Iran's nuclear program and its support of international terrorism are not only a danger for Israel but for the entire Western civilization.''
The Security Council ``condemned the remarks the first time he made them,'' White House spokesman Scott McClellan said in Washington. ``I think all responsible leaders in the international community recognize how outrageous such comments are.''
The U.S. government, which bans American companies from doing business in Iran, says Iran sponsors terrorism by backing groups such as the Palestinian Hamas and the Shiite Muslim Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hezbollah was formed in 1982 with the help of Iran's Revolutionary Guards after Israel invaded Lebanon.
Yesterday, the Iranian president reiterated his support for Hamas, which has carried out suicide attacks against Israeli targets, after meeting its political leader, Khalid Mashaal.
``We are all obliged to heed our religious and divine responsibilities in offering services to the Palestinian movement,'' Ahmadinejad told Mashaal in Tehran, the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency reported.
Oil Sales
Iran exported crude oil to Israel until the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Republic's founder, put an end to that trade. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader since Khomeini died, has repeatedly called for Arab and Islamic countries to suspend oil sales to Israel.
Anti-Israeli and anti-U.S. comments are frequent in Iran. Friday prayers throughout the country are regularly punctuated by ``Death to Israel, Death to the U.S.'' slogans. Anti-U.S. paintings also abound in Tehran, including those on the wall of the building that served as the U.S. Embassy.
The war of words goes in both directions, with Iran referring to the U.S. as ``the Great Satan'' and U.S. President George W. Bush in 2002 calling Iran part of an ``axis of evil'' that included North Korea and Iraq during Saddam Hussein's rule.
To contact the reporter on this story:
Marc Wolfensberger in Tehran at mwolfens@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: December 14, 2005 12:49 EST
Dec. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the Nazi Holocaust a ``myth'' and said Europe, the U.S. and Canada should use their own land for a Jewish state.
The West has ``fabricated a myth under the name `Massacre of the Jews,' and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves,'' Iran's leader told thousands of supporters in the southeastern Sistan-Baluchestan province, in a speech aired live today on state television.
``If you say and insist it's true that you killed 6 million Jews in crematoria during World War II, then why should the Palestinians pay for that?'' Ahmadinejad asked, referring to Europeans. ``Our proposal is that you give a piece of your land in Europe, the U.S., Canada or Alaska. If you do that, the Iranian people will no longer protest against you.''
This is the strongest anti-Israeli public comment by Ahmadinejad since he took office in August. The Iranian president drew international condemnation on Oct. 26 after saying that Israel should be ``wiped off the map.'' On Dec. 8, he prompted another outcry when he said Europe should host Israel on its soil. Some 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis until Germany's defeat in the 1939-1945 war.
Remarks `Deliberate'
His remarks are ``deliberate'' and fulfill different aims, said Olivier Roy, a specialist on Central Asia and Islam at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique in Paris.
``First he wants to cut the grass under the feet of other elements in the regime that favor a more open stance with the U.S.,'' Roy said in a telephone interview. ``Secondly, he's a pure product of the revolution, who is just not interested in diplomacy. And finally, the situation in Iraq makes him feel in a position of strength, as an attack from the U.S. or Israel looks highly unlikely at the moment.''
The remarks by Ahmadinejad, whose election in June gave backers of the Islamic revolution full power over state institutions, have added to tensions as Iran faces possible United Nations sanctions over its nuclear program.
Talks between the European Union and Iran, aimed at ending the standoff over the nuclear program, are scheduled to resume on Dec. 21. The negotiations broke down in August after Iran resumed uranium conversion, an initial step to increase the concentration of the U-235 isotope that starts and sustains a nuclear reaction.
`Legitimate Nuclear Rights'
``Be certain that we will not back away one iota from our legitimate nuclear rights,'' Agence France-Presse quoted Ahmadinejad as saying today in Sistan-Baluchestan province.
Iran's president, like his predecessor Mohammad Khatami, has said the country has a ``legitimate right'' to develop a nuclear power program. The U.S. alleges Iran is gearing up to build a nuclear bomb.
The board of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency voted in September to refer the dispute over Iran's nuclear program to the 15-nation UN Security Council, without setting a date.
The U.S. and its European allies decided last month not to press for such referral immediately, in order to allow more time for an agreement that would permit Iran's uranium enrichment to take place in Russia.
`Extremist Regime'
``We hope the international community takes these comments about wiping Israel off the map very seriously and wakes up to the nature of this extremist regime,'' Raanan Gissin, a spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, said in a telephone interview from Jerusalem. ``Iran's nuclear program and its support of international terrorism are not only a danger for Israel but for the entire Western civilization.''
The Security Council ``condemned the remarks the first time he made them,'' White House spokesman Scott McClellan said in Washington. ``I think all responsible leaders in the international community recognize how outrageous such comments are.''
The U.S. government, which bans American companies from doing business in Iran, says Iran sponsors terrorism by backing groups such as the Palestinian Hamas and the Shiite Muslim Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hezbollah was formed in 1982 with the help of Iran's Revolutionary Guards after Israel invaded Lebanon.
Yesterday, the Iranian president reiterated his support for Hamas, which has carried out suicide attacks against Israeli targets, after meeting its political leader, Khalid Mashaal.
``We are all obliged to heed our religious and divine responsibilities in offering services to the Palestinian movement,'' Ahmadinejad told Mashaal in Tehran, the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency reported.
Oil Sales
Iran exported crude oil to Israel until the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Republic's founder, put an end to that trade. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader since Khomeini died, has repeatedly called for Arab and Islamic countries to suspend oil sales to Israel.
Anti-Israeli and anti-U.S. comments are frequent in Iran. Friday prayers throughout the country are regularly punctuated by ``Death to Israel, Death to the U.S.'' slogans. Anti-U.S. paintings also abound in Tehran, including those on the wall of the building that served as the U.S. Embassy.
The war of words goes in both directions, with Iran referring to the U.S. as ``the Great Satan'' and U.S. President George W. Bush in 2002 calling Iran part of an ``axis of evil'' that included North Korea and Iraq during Saddam Hussein's rule.
To contact the reporter on this story:
Marc Wolfensberger in Tehran at mwolfens@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: December 14, 2005 12:49 EST
Friday, November 25, 2005
Disturbing thoughts on Human Nature
Disturbing thoughts on human nature
In the back of my head I sometimes wonder if some Russian boy enjoyed making threats and stealing lunch money from weak and sensitive artist's wannabes thus planting the seedlings for Operation Barbarossa or the Final Solution. Sometimes people think that small actions do not have great consequences but I think they do. If you take the sine of a small angle; it might be small for a short period but it becomes large after a while and absurdity has no limit.
The distinctions between good and evil are not always clearly drawn. Why are we forced to react with overwhelming force in order to get respect? A simple concept so universal that it was even in the kid’s movie, “The Incredibles”. Incredi-boy got rich by selling weapons to countries that wanted respect. I've never heard a complaint from Marines in my unit; and some of them have had to go to Iraq twice. But why do we have to use force. America’s founding Fathers were isolationists and we always tried to avoid involvement in WWI and WWII, but eventually were sucked into both of them. Humans are proud, arrogant and belligerent by nature, seeking bovine pleasures, mere brute beasts. I don’t think I want to write a book but sometimes I think that if I wrote a history book it would start with the phrase, “The history of mankind is the history of brute beasts”. Positionally we were created in God’s image with potential for good but conditionally we act like brute beasts. Of course if you believe in evolution then we act like monkeys. It takes at least sense, education and will to act against nature. But then again like Stalin said; “take a chicken skin it alive and it will follow you and love you”. So maybe the smart ones figured that out and just act accordingly. Sad to day people are sometimes no better than chickens. In a feeding frenzy they all and at the same time go for the grain on their neighbors’ head. Only the first chicken gets it but they all peck until only the white skull is seen. Then they peck some more at the odd visage. Why not treat people with kindness, fairness and respect? Respect of person and respect of property. Is that taught anymore? True, it might lead to a boring life. We want sin and errors, really, Huxley’s observation of society. In such atmosphere any small light shines brightly. Every relationship has benefits and responsibilities. We want the gratification.
As composer Jerry Goldsmith put it in "If We Could Remember" (The Sum of All Fears soundtrack) ... sorrow clings to angry questions. So nobody is intrinsically bad; just trying to get justice by their own means or creating a sham of hardness to protect themselves. Some swing the ax and others get near it. What would be today's image of Franz Kafka's "Ein Landarzt" final scene? They would not only want the miracle, but it'd have to be cool too. Deep calls upon deep and somewhere deep inside God's image is still there. In the end; there is a bright side. I’m thankful for those instances of goodness and kindness.
Any international issues are beyond my scope of influence. But they are, I think, a picture of the world around you. And your circle of influence is a microcosm of the world; if you will. I’m thinking of William Golding’s “Lord of the Flies”. Those near you take their place as historical figures for goodness and evil, but oh in such a subtle manner.
In the back of my head I sometimes wonder if some Russian boy enjoyed making threats and stealing lunch money from weak and sensitive artist's wannabes thus planting the seedlings for Operation Barbarossa or the Final Solution. Sometimes people think that small actions do not have great consequences but I think they do. If you take the sine of a small angle; it might be small for a short period but it becomes large after a while and absurdity has no limit.
The distinctions between good and evil are not always clearly drawn. Why are we forced to react with overwhelming force in order to get respect? A simple concept so universal that it was even in the kid’s movie, “The Incredibles”. Incredi-boy got rich by selling weapons to countries that wanted respect. I've never heard a complaint from Marines in my unit; and some of them have had to go to Iraq twice. But why do we have to use force. America’s founding Fathers were isolationists and we always tried to avoid involvement in WWI and WWII, but eventually were sucked into both of them. Humans are proud, arrogant and belligerent by nature, seeking bovine pleasures, mere brute beasts. I don’t think I want to write a book but sometimes I think that if I wrote a history book it would start with the phrase, “The history of mankind is the history of brute beasts”. Positionally we were created in God’s image with potential for good but conditionally we act like brute beasts. Of course if you believe in evolution then we act like monkeys. It takes at least sense, education and will to act against nature. But then again like Stalin said; “take a chicken skin it alive and it will follow you and love you”. So maybe the smart ones figured that out and just act accordingly. Sad to day people are sometimes no better than chickens. In a feeding frenzy they all and at the same time go for the grain on their neighbors’ head. Only the first chicken gets it but they all peck until only the white skull is seen. Then they peck some more at the odd visage. Why not treat people with kindness, fairness and respect? Respect of person and respect of property. Is that taught anymore? True, it might lead to a boring life. We want sin and errors, really, Huxley’s observation of society. In such atmosphere any small light shines brightly. Every relationship has benefits and responsibilities. We want the gratification.
As composer Jerry Goldsmith put it in "If We Could Remember" (The Sum of All Fears soundtrack) ... sorrow clings to angry questions. So nobody is intrinsically bad; just trying to get justice by their own means or creating a sham of hardness to protect themselves. Some swing the ax and others get near it. What would be today's image of Franz Kafka's "Ein Landarzt" final scene? They would not only want the miracle, but it'd have to be cool too. Deep calls upon deep and somewhere deep inside God's image is still there. In the end; there is a bright side. I’m thankful for those instances of goodness and kindness.
Any international issues are beyond my scope of influence. But they are, I think, a picture of the world around you. And your circle of influence is a microcosm of the world; if you will. I’m thinking of William Golding’s “Lord of the Flies”. Those near you take their place as historical figures for goodness and evil, but oh in such a subtle manner.
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
Sunday, October 09, 2005
Truly great Classical Music; hard to find
It starts from ancient times through church music and the proper classical period. There are the vocal styles of Palestrina and all the big names in the Baroque era like Bach on to the Viennese style and the romantics. It's very hard to find good classical music though. You have so many elements that affect the quality of the music. You have the composer, the performers, the conductor or director, the recording and then it depends on whether the performers played the piece as it was written or if they made their own modifications. If they though the repetition of a certain theme was too much. Like everything else people who sell it are not exactly interested in so much the art as just selling it purely for lucrative motives. The abundance of poorly executed classical music maybe one of the reasons there aren’t more people who can truly appreciate classical music. I like Bach's harpsichord pieces but they are so hard to find. Even great Arias are hard to find. They try to sell you some poorly recorded excerpt of an opera. Just like today's music. I tend to think that live opera arias are not necessarily of the best quality. They turn out better in a studio. That's just me. What do I know?
Some people think that some piano music put together can pass as classical. Just like a salad. The best salad I've had was the "Ensalada Mexicana" at La Salsa. That was great greens and good dressing meal. Unfortunately that salad was discontinued from the menu. Those qualitative distinctions are sometimes hard to perceive and put into words. It's like describing two cars. Both with aerodynamic styles, 16 inch wheels, black and so forth, one a Ford Taurus and the other a BMW 745i. Both great cars but I think that most people would agree that the BMW 745i is not only a more potent machine but also more aesthetically designed. And while I'm on the subject of subjectivity; it’s similar with personality and character. Those intangible but so important qualities of humans; which spills over into politics and social behavior. It's easier to take the path of exactness and measurability in mathematics and science; but not everything is measurable. One has to wade a turbulent stream of great music poorly performed, unreliable technology and immature and undependable character to find the truly worthwhile things in life. In the end you want to find yourself in your ideal car, listening to your ideal music accompanied by that special person enjoying the road we call life.
Some people think that some piano music put together can pass as classical. Just like a salad. The best salad I've had was the "Ensalada Mexicana" at La Salsa. That was great greens and good dressing meal. Unfortunately that salad was discontinued from the menu. Those qualitative distinctions are sometimes hard to perceive and put into words. It's like describing two cars. Both with aerodynamic styles, 16 inch wheels, black and so forth, one a Ford Taurus and the other a BMW 745i. Both great cars but I think that most people would agree that the BMW 745i is not only a more potent machine but also more aesthetically designed. And while I'm on the subject of subjectivity; it’s similar with personality and character. Those intangible but so important qualities of humans; which spills over into politics and social behavior. It's easier to take the path of exactness and measurability in mathematics and science; but not everything is measurable. One has to wade a turbulent stream of great music poorly performed, unreliable technology and immature and undependable character to find the truly worthwhile things in life. In the end you want to find yourself in your ideal car, listening to your ideal music accompanied by that special person enjoying the road we call life.
Saturday, October 08, 2005
Friday, July 29, 2005
Friday, July 08, 2005
Tabs Added to IE 6
I just wrote in my blog about browser wars and Microsoft listens!!! We got tabs in IE, whohoo.
Netscape is not friendly with bloglines so I can use it in IE now :)
Netscape is not friendly with bloglines so I can use it in IE now :)
Monday, July 04, 2005
Browser wars
Well this is an old topic. There are a miriad of posts commentaries and blogs online that go into tons of infomation and details, conspiracy theories and so forth. A lot of them are mostly rants about how evil Microsoft is. Just google "browser wars"and you'll get about two million results. Here is one such site ... http://www.evolt.org/article/
Browser_Wars_II_The_Saga_Continues/25/60181/
Here is a cool chart...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars
My two cents is simply. Netscape's two cool features are multitab and just now added a cool button for webmail in version 8. Other than that, Netscape is using the IE and Mozilla's engines underneath. I'm not even sure multitabs are that essential anyway.
There are many toolbars such a google's that I use that I would miss out side of IE. The two things that I hear from a technology standpoint are IE and viruses. Well I have norton's symantec and keep it updated. The other one is the standards such as css. well that's a tough one. There are tons of cool things people try to do online but you can't be all things to all people.
Now the next version of IE will be IE 7, which apparently won't be around for a while. Unfortunately we may need to upgrade to the next version of Windows in order to get it.
In Conclusion, the spirited wars continue. I'm just a user, although an advanced user I have a whole lot of other things to do than worry about whose trying to take over the world with a browser. They are all good. I don't think I'm missing much with one or the other and a little competition is just good. Look at Sun. I think they were a much stronger company before McNeally decided to spend all their cash on lawsuits and then ended up just licensing Java.
Browser_Wars_II_The_Saga_Continues/25/60181/
Here is a cool chart...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars
My two cents is simply. Netscape's two cool features are multitab and just now added a cool button for webmail in version 8. Other than that, Netscape is using the IE and Mozilla's engines underneath. I'm not even sure multitabs are that essential anyway.
There are many toolbars such a google's that I use that I would miss out side of IE. The two things that I hear from a technology standpoint are IE and viruses. Well I have norton's symantec and keep it updated. The other one is the standards such as css. well that's a tough one. There are tons of cool things people try to do online but you can't be all things to all people.
Now the next version of IE will be IE 7, which apparently won't be around for a while. Unfortunately we may need to upgrade to the next version of Windows in order to get it.
In Conclusion, the spirited wars continue. I'm just a user, although an advanced user I have a whole lot of other things to do than worry about whose trying to take over the world with a browser. They are all good. I don't think I'm missing much with one or the other and a little competition is just good. Look at Sun. I think they were a much stronger company before McNeally decided to spend all their cash on lawsuits and then ended up just licensing Java.
Sunday, July 03, 2005
Saturday, July 02, 2005
J# and 64 bit cpus
J# and 64 bit cpus I was at Fry’s today and I did not see any book on J#. It seems to be mostly for the education community; except for a few developers using J#.
The talk nowadays is 64 bit computing and the code for it. Of course 64 bit has been around for a while for unix and also Itanium and Opteron but it’s starting to go mainstream. Windows XP 64 bit as well as some linux distributions are already supporting it.
Photoshop 7 was making my picture viewing slow
My computer was taking forever just to show picture thumbnails. I had associated jpegs with Photoshop 7 and it made it slow due to thumbnail creation. I removed it and now I can view pictures fast and switch from one folder to another quickly.
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Tone (linguistics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia very interesting
A very interesting feature of some languages. Tone actually develops!!
Tone (linguistics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Tone (linguistics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
Saturday, November 13, 2004
Sparc 20 sold for a measly $20 on Ebay
Sparc 20 sold for a measly $20 on Ebay
I can hardly believe that I paid so much for this computer. I still like it and it's a good comp but I don't want to haul around the huge monitor. I sold it locally only because I did not want to ship that beast.
Long Time...
My blogging career has basically stalled. It's been a while since I wrote. I would like to write something that you cannot find out there. There are a lot of negatice posts by democrats who just do not seem to understand that not everyone thinks their way is the only way. It's arrogant and sad. I don't feel like contributing to the pandemonium. I already see good signs in the air. Oil prices going down, stock market picking up. I just pray that all things turn for the better. I'll probably be leaving soon anyway to fight terror at the source.
I'm working at a new company since August 2004, allposters.com. It's a busy fast paced environment. I go to school and surf. That pretty much takes up my life for now. Maybe another day I feel inspired.
I'm working at a new company since August 2004, allposters.com. It's a busy fast paced environment. I go to school and surf. That pretty much takes up my life for now. Maybe another day I feel inspired.
Saturday, July 24, 2004
Lance Armstrong the beast of steel
There is a man that makes no excuses and works hard to achieve victory.
Lance Armstrong factfile
Name: Lance Armstrong
Born: Plano, Texas
Age: 32
Height: 5ft 8in (1.77m)
Weight: 11st 11lbs (75kg)
1992: Member of US Olympic team. Finishes 12th in Road Race.
1993: Tour de France debut. Wins a stage.
1995: Devastated by death of team-mate Fabio Casartelli during Tour. Wins stage 18 and dedicates it to the Italian. Finishes 36th.
1996: Member of US Olympic team. Diagnosed with testicular cancer, which spreads to brain.
1997: Declared cancer-free. Signs with US Postal Service.
1998: Fourth in road race and time trial at World Championships.
1999: Wins Tour de France for the first time, winning the Prologue, the two time trials and ninth stage.
2000: Wins Tour de France, having suffered 45mph crash during training in Pyrenees. Member of US Olympic team: wins bronze, individual time trial, 13th in road race.
2001: Ranked No 1 in the world for first time. Completes hat-trick of Tour de France victories.
2002: Wins Tour de France, becoming only the fifth man to win the event four times (joining Eddy Merckx, Bernard Hinault, Jacques Anquetil and Miguel Indurain).
2003: Tour win number five.
Lance Armstrong factfile
Name: Lance Armstrong
Born: Plano, Texas
Age: 32
Height: 5ft 8in (1.77m)
Weight: 11st 11lbs (75kg)
1992: Member of US Olympic team. Finishes 12th in Road Race.
1993: Tour de France debut. Wins a stage.
1995: Devastated by death of team-mate Fabio Casartelli during Tour. Wins stage 18 and dedicates it to the Italian. Finishes 36th.
1996: Member of US Olympic team. Diagnosed with testicular cancer, which spreads to brain.
1997: Declared cancer-free. Signs with US Postal Service.
1998: Fourth in road race and time trial at World Championships.
1999: Wins Tour de France for the first time, winning the Prologue, the two time trials and ninth stage.
2000: Wins Tour de France, having suffered 45mph crash during training in Pyrenees. Member of US Olympic team: wins bronze, individual time trial, 13th in road race.
2001: Ranked No 1 in the world for first time. Completes hat-trick of Tour de France victories.
2002: Wins Tour de France, becoming only the fifth man to win the event four times (joining Eddy Merckx, Bernard Hinault, Jacques Anquetil and Miguel Indurain).
2003: Tour win number five.
