Amazing. As if it wasn't dangerous enough that the born-again fundamentalist Christian President of the United States "talks to a Higher Father" before attacking other countries, we now have his Generals confirming Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is also on speaking terms with God. Wow. If Bush says he is doing Jesus' work, is Rumsfeld the modern St. Peter? Scary. I wonder how the General knew.... It would be ironic if the NSA was listening in to Bush and Rumsfeld conversations with Jesus!
Here's the news item:
===
"Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace defended Donald Rumsfeld yesterday, saying that "the good lord" tells the Secretary of Defense "what is best for our country." Meanwhile, President Bush, Sec. Rumsfeld, and other advisers face an increasingly violent and chaotic situation in Iraq. Said Richard Haass, the former chief of policy planning at the State Department, "The Iraq situation is not winnable in any real sense of the word 'winnable.""
===
Yeah...? But I am sure we will have some Bush apologists start discussing "What is the meaning of winnnable?"
Friday, October 20, 2006
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
As The (Consumer Electronics) World Turns, Apple Should Buy Sony
Today's news items show one more nail in the coffin of Sony's once stellar reputation.
After Apple, Toshiba, Lenovo (IBM), Dell and many others announced the recall of Sony-made laptop batteries, the tragicomedy of Sony continued.
Today, Sony had the ignominy of announcing the recall of Sony batteries from their own laptops. The irony is that a company like Toshiba (that I have owned a laptop of and called TOSHItBA) is going to sue a previous quality and image leader like Sony for (drum roll) doing damage to Toshiba's image. THAT has gotta hurt!
Dell's laptop battery recall is a problem for them, but Dell is not a company I ever considered more than a telephone operator taking orders for boring widget like devices. So, as their own customer base turns away from them for low quality (which was always evident but people who paid low prices did not want to see it), and as manufacturers like HP start doing the "Cheaply Made In China" thing, Dell is finding their ugly, horrible, and often useless customer support system an additional weight around their neck as they start to drown. They can't even sue Sony for THAT.
Apple will recover money from Sony for the bad batteries, but appears to have avoided suffering any hit on their image for quality in this fiasco.
In the meantime, Sony, who created the portable music industry with the Walkman a few decades ago, is nowhere near Apple's iPod. At the same time as Apple's iPod becomes more and more popular, they are making successful forays into consumer electronics. That is an irony that will hurt Sony too.
At one time Sony had a chance to own Apple. Yet Sony foolishly continued to build PCs. Sony's then quality products like Vaio went in the marketplace just to make Microsoft stronger and stronger. Microsoft then used that wealth to enter and eat away at Sony's video games business.
But that was not enough. Sony then shot itself in the foot at EVERY stage. Walkman, Music Store, PSP, now batteries, not to mention next generation DVD. How much further can they fall?
Maybe it's time Sony made a deal with Apple. Unlike 10 years ago, when Sony could have bought Apple, I say, Steve Jobs, buy Sony, please, and save that once great brand.
After Apple, Toshiba, Lenovo (IBM), Dell and many others announced the recall of Sony-made laptop batteries, the tragicomedy of Sony continued.
Today, Sony had the ignominy of announcing the recall of Sony batteries from their own laptops. The irony is that a company like Toshiba (that I have owned a laptop of and called TOSHItBA) is going to sue a previous quality and image leader like Sony for (drum roll) doing damage to Toshiba's image. THAT has gotta hurt!
Dell's laptop battery recall is a problem for them, but Dell is not a company I ever considered more than a telephone operator taking orders for boring widget like devices. So, as their own customer base turns away from them for low quality (which was always evident but people who paid low prices did not want to see it), and as manufacturers like HP start doing the "Cheaply Made In China" thing, Dell is finding their ugly, horrible, and often useless customer support system an additional weight around their neck as they start to drown. They can't even sue Sony for THAT.
Apple will recover money from Sony for the bad batteries, but appears to have avoided suffering any hit on their image for quality in this fiasco.
In the meantime, Sony, who created the portable music industry with the Walkman a few decades ago, is nowhere near Apple's iPod. At the same time as Apple's iPod becomes more and more popular, they are making successful forays into consumer electronics. That is an irony that will hurt Sony too.
At one time Sony had a chance to own Apple. Yet Sony foolishly continued to build PCs. Sony's then quality products like Vaio went in the marketplace just to make Microsoft stronger and stronger. Microsoft then used that wealth to enter and eat away at Sony's video games business.
But that was not enough. Sony then shot itself in the foot at EVERY stage. Walkman, Music Store, PSP, now batteries, not to mention next generation DVD. How much further can they fall?
Maybe it's time Sony made a deal with Apple. Unlike 10 years ago, when Sony could have bought Apple, I say, Steve Jobs, buy Sony, please, and save that once great brand.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
To Buy Or Not To Buy: Wells Fargo Financial's Moronic Browser Choice Means NO
It amazes me how dumb and moronic some companies can be. Here is Wells Fargo, whose WellsFargoFinancial.com web site will not let you conduct business or even log in, much less payments unless you are using the worst or lamest or deadest browsers in the world... this is from their web site. If you are picking a credit or financial services firm, and hoping to go online from almost any computer that you may have access to, avoid Wells Fargo. From being a web pioneer, they are now brain dead in their selection of browers being forced on users... better to pick a different bank than use one of these lame browsers.
Imran
Their web site demands these great high end browsers to pay your bills online:
"Netscape® 6.XX and 7.XX
* Netscape Navigator/Communicator Upgrade for Windows
* Netscape Upgrade for Macintosh
Microsoft® Internet Explorer (MSIE) 5.X - 6.XX
* MSIE Upgrade for Windows
America Online® 4.0 - AOL 8.0 for Windows; use with MSIE 5.X - 6.0
* America Online Browser Upgrade""
You can write a detailed complaint to them and this is what you get back.... note the directive not to bother them anymore with email replies.. they will not be read. Nice touch.
---
From: wffcustomerservice@wellsfargo.com
Subject: In response to your WellsFargoFinancial inquiry
Thank you for your correspondence. If you need assistance with online bill pay, please contact Wells Fargo Financial Customer Service at 800-346-3009 (M-F) 8:30-5:00 CST for assistance.
Please do not reply directly to this email.
---
Imran
Their web site demands these great high end browsers to pay your bills online:
"Netscape® 6.XX and 7.XX
* Netscape Navigator/Communicator Upgrade for Windows
* Netscape Upgrade for Macintosh
Microsoft® Internet Explorer (MSIE) 5.X - 6.XX
* MSIE Upgrade for Windows
America Online® 4.0 - AOL 8.0 for Windows; use with MSIE 5.X - 6.0
* America Online Browser Upgrade""
You can write a detailed complaint to them and this is what you get back.... note the directive not to bother them anymore with email replies.. they will not be read. Nice touch.
---
From: wffcustomerservice@wellsfargo.com
Subject: In response to your WellsFargoFinancial inquiry
Thank you for your correspondence. If you need assistance with online bill pay, please contact Wells Fargo Financial Customer Service at 800-346-3009 (M-F) 8:30-5:00 CST for assistance.
Please do not reply directly to this email.
---
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Target TARGET: Justice Blind, But Does It Have To Be Stupid?
As if there are not enough statements by people like George W. Bush, Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Mark Foley and even Bill Frist to leave me scratching my head, not to mention people like Nancy Pelosi and others, here's something else.
This woman Federal Judge, Marilyn Hall Patel, (who also sounds ethnically confused to me) has declared that the BLIND can SUE a company, TARGET in this case, to force them to make their web site accessible to the blind.
You HAVE to be kidding me. No pun intended, but I can't see the logic. I am fortunate to have no major disability, especially, no problems with vision, etc. And, being blind is the one thing I would beg God not to make me.
Though sometimes I have seen the abuse of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), at least it is great to know we live in a society that cares about its disabled.
Yet, forcing a business of ANY size to make their WEB SITE accessible to the blind is one of the worst abuses of law to make such a claim and the judgenot summarily throwing out this ridiculous and ludicrous lawsuit shows me how little logic or brains she has in her skull. Already, if a blind person is using a computer, they can have the TEXT of the page read out to them by existing computer technology.
That will generally also hear the computer speak the price or description of the item. On top of that, what exactly is a company supposed to do? Should it have a translation of every sound or music on its web site so a DEAF person can READ the effects? Should it change its two-click procedures to telepathy clicks for people with no hands or even carpal tunnel syndrome?
Where does this stop? What's stopping STUPID judges, evil lawyers, and exploitative people from next forcing every can of Campbell's Soup, or bottle of Pepsi Cola to also have all the labels in Braille AND having those mini-speakers talking out the contents of the package and the label description?
What about all of us, that have a sense of smell but are not served the aroma of a perfume or cologne, or baked cookies or chocolate when we go to a web site? Should we all sue ALL of the makers of the web industry for not providing a mechanism for us to SMELL something?
This lawsuit stinks, and you don't need a web-smell-generator to see that. Even a blind man can see that.
This woman Federal Judge, Marilyn Hall Patel, (who also sounds ethnically confused to me) has declared that the BLIND can SUE a company, TARGET in this case, to force them to make their web site accessible to the blind.
You HAVE to be kidding me. No pun intended, but I can't see the logic. I am fortunate to have no major disability, especially, no problems with vision, etc. And, being blind is the one thing I would beg God not to make me.
Though sometimes I have seen the abuse of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), at least it is great to know we live in a society that cares about its disabled.
Yet, forcing a business of ANY size to make their WEB SITE accessible to the blind is one of the worst abuses of law to make such a claim and the judgenot summarily throwing out this ridiculous and ludicrous lawsuit shows me how little logic or brains she has in her skull. Already, if a blind person is using a computer, they can have the TEXT of the page read out to them by existing computer technology.
That will generally also hear the computer speak the price or description of the item. On top of that, what exactly is a company supposed to do? Should it have a translation of every sound or music on its web site so a DEAF person can READ the effects? Should it change its two-click procedures to telepathy clicks for people with no hands or even carpal tunnel syndrome?
Where does this stop? What's stopping STUPID judges, evil lawyers, and exploitative people from next forcing every can of Campbell's Soup, or bottle of Pepsi Cola to also have all the labels in Braille AND having those mini-speakers talking out the contents of the package and the label description?
What about all of us, that have a sense of smell but are not served the aroma of a perfume or cologne, or baked cookies or chocolate when we go to a web site? Should we all sue ALL of the makers of the web industry for not providing a mechanism for us to SMELL something?
This lawsuit stinks, and you don't need a web-smell-generator to see that. Even a blind man can see that.
Frist On Fritz, Tallies Taliban Winners
News Items show that Bill Frist, the Republican Senate Majority leader has declared that the Taliban, the people who hosted, protected and served Osama Bin Laden before, during and after his attack on America, should be brought back into power.
Apart from scratching my head - and wanting to whip out something else for him to suck on - I cannot, for the life of me, imagine how that "stays the course" or validates Preisdent George W. Bush's repeated, false and dumb, assessments that things are rosy all around. Often, things are so rosy, you could almost see the rivers turn red from the blood being spilled into them in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I wonder what are the next pronouncements from Bill Frist. Bring Saddam back into power in Iraq? Recognize Fidel Castro's regime in Cuba? Finally declare Al Gore the winner in 2000 elections?
Apart from scratching my head - and wanting to whip out something else for him to suck on - I cannot, for the life of me, imagine how that "stays the course" or validates Preisdent George W. Bush's repeated, false and dumb, assessments that things are rosy all around. Often, things are so rosy, you could almost see the rivers turn red from the blood being spilled into them in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I wonder what are the next pronouncements from Bill Frist. Bring Saddam back into power in Iraq? Recognize Fidel Castro's regime in Cuba? Finally declare Al Gore the winner in 2000 elections?
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Guilty, If Innocent
I wrote a letter to the editors of Esquire magazine (a really great publication that I encourage people to read in general). It was inspired by this absolutely incredible, shocking, eye-opening, soul-shaking article written by their Tom Junod on John Walker Lindh, the American Taliban, aka Hamza.
If you have not read it, please read it here. You will be shaken by it as I was, and I encourage you to click and post a comment on their site. Here is what I wrote.
To: The Editor, Esquire
From: Imran Anwar
Sorry. Sorry. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you. Huh? What? Why?
I have been reading your magazine since I was a teen growing up in Pakistan in the late 70's, reading my late uncle's magazines. Over the years, I moved to America and remain a subscriber.
Loved the articles, loved the styles, loved many things about it. But it took something specific to get me to write.
Sorry it took me so long to write in response to an incredible, brilliant, shocking, eye-opening and soul-shaking article by Tom Junod in your July 2006 issue.
I tore it out, have made several people read it and still shudder to think how this man John Walker Lindh is being treated by our government.
As a Muslim American opposed to many US policies abroad but aghast at Taliban and Bin Laden type evil killers, even I had gotten caught up in the fever asking for John Walker Lindh's head, for being with "them" and against "us".
After I read Mr. Junod's article, I wonder how many years it will be before we can apologize to Mr. Lindh for how we silently let our government treat him.
Yes, people like me, and many others, write our blogs and do our podcasts, but nothing can come close to what respected publications like yours can do, and have done, to expose what we treat this prisoner as. He is not perfect, but nothing he actually DID could justify how America treats him and will for decades.
So, sorry I did not write earlier, and sorry, I am powerless to change the ways of my government, and thank you from a Muslim, thank you from a proud American and thank you from a devoted reader for having the courage, and, yes, decency, to write and publishd that article.
Sincerely
Imran
http://IMRAN.TV
If you have not read it, please read it here. You will be shaken by it as I was, and I encourage you to click and post a comment on their site. Here is what I wrote.
To: The Editor, Esquire
From: Imran Anwar
Sorry. Sorry. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you. Huh? What? Why?
I have been reading your magazine since I was a teen growing up in Pakistan in the late 70's, reading my late uncle's magazines. Over the years, I moved to America and remain a subscriber.
Loved the articles, loved the styles, loved many things about it. But it took something specific to get me to write.
Sorry it took me so long to write in response to an incredible, brilliant, shocking, eye-opening and soul-shaking article by Tom Junod in your July 2006 issue.
I tore it out, have made several people read it and still shudder to think how this man John Walker Lindh is being treated by our government.
As a Muslim American opposed to many US policies abroad but aghast at Taliban and Bin Laden type evil killers, even I had gotten caught up in the fever asking for John Walker Lindh's head, for being with "them" and against "us".
After I read Mr. Junod's article, I wonder how many years it will be before we can apologize to Mr. Lindh for how we silently let our government treat him.
Yes, people like me, and many others, write our blogs and do our podcasts, but nothing can come close to what respected publications like yours can do, and have done, to expose what we treat this prisoner as. He is not perfect, but nothing he actually DID could justify how America treats him and will for decades.
So, sorry I did not write earlier, and sorry, I am powerless to change the ways of my government, and thank you from a Muslim, thank you from a proud American and thank you from a devoted reader for having the courage, and, yes, decency, to write and publishd that article.
Sincerely
Imran
http://IMRAN.TV
Pope Versus Pope
I just love this comment in Newsweek's great article on Pope Benedict's anti-Islam statement (and his lame fake apology)....
Going forward, the pope could usefully consult the words of another powerful Christian leader: “And given that Islam and Christianity worship the one God, Creator of heaven and earth, there is ample room for agreement and cooperation between them,” the leader said three months after September 11. “A clash ensues only when Islam or Christianity is misconstrued or manipulated for political or ideological ends.” The leader? John Paul II.
Only more stark difference between these two men is... The late Pope had resisted the Nazis, this current Pope was (is?) one.
Heily Vater?
Going forward, the pope could usefully consult the words of another powerful Christian leader: “And given that Islam and Christianity worship the one God, Creator of heaven and earth, there is ample room for agreement and cooperation between them,” the leader said three months after September 11. “A clash ensues only when Islam or Christianity is misconstrued or manipulated for political or ideological ends.” The leader? John Paul II.
Only more stark difference between these two men is... The late Pope had resisted the Nazis, this current Pope was (is?) one.
Heily Vater?
Monday, September 25, 2006
No Apology From Pope, But Here Are Some Good First Steps
As I wrote previously, the Pope did not offer an honest or direct apology to Muslims, but at least his meeting with the Ambassadors of Muslim countries was a step in the right direction. Dialog, even with an intellectually dishonest man, is slightly better than fanatics on two sides throwing bombs and rockets at each other. The question is, what is the dialog going to be about? It's not the Pope raining bombs and invading Muslim countries, and it's not the Imam of Kaaba sending suicide bombers to kill innocent children.
What these two religious leaderships can do is declare that:
a) crusading invaders like evil AND stupid George W. Bush are going to Hell,
b) murderous evil cunning people like Bin Laden are going to Hell,
c) killing 40,000 people in a country to make Haliburton rich is EVIL,
d) blowing up civilians with suicide bombs is EVI,
e) arming a Zionazi tyrant Israeli government to kill people in Lebanon and practice a new holocaust on Palestinians is EVIL,
f) letting Arab-backed tribes kill people in Darfur Sudan is EVIL
g) protecting pedophile priests is EVIL
h) protecting CIA torture-masters is EVIL
i) defending Zionazi Israelis keeping Palestinians under Occupation is EVIL
The list could go on, but this would be a good start... I wonder, what would Jesus do? What do you think?
What these two religious leaderships can do is declare that:
a) crusading invaders like evil AND stupid George W. Bush are going to Hell,
b) murderous evil cunning people like Bin Laden are going to Hell,
c) killing 40,000 people in a country to make Haliburton rich is EVIL,
d) blowing up civilians with suicide bombs is EVI,
e) arming a Zionazi tyrant Israeli government to kill people in Lebanon and practice a new holocaust on Palestinians is EVIL,
f) letting Arab-backed tribes kill people in Darfur Sudan is EVIL
g) protecting pedophile priests is EVIL
h) protecting CIA torture-masters is EVIL
i) defending Zionazi Israelis keeping Palestinians under Occupation is EVIL
The list could go on, but this would be a good start... I wonder, what would Jesus do? What do you think?
Sunday, September 24, 2006
To Buy Or Not To Buy: PayPal & eBvil eBay Empire - NO
This is not my typical politics related comment, but something I wrote on a friend's blog related to eBvil eBay.
I really have nothing nice to say about eBay after some experiences. I bought stuff from merchants that eBay listed in one of their highlight pages. Got crap, left negative feedback for the seller (I was not the only one) but also raised the issue with eBay but they did not bother to remove the people from their favored lists. No response.
I had a perfect 100% rating. I sold an item to someone and shipped the item certified by USPS as advertised on the listing page. He paid by paypal (now a part of the eBvil Empire) AND I used their stupid system to pay for postage and print the label. Delivered the item to the post office. USPS lost the item. Buyer did NOT buy or ask for insurance.
When item did not get to him he complained that I did not ship. I sent him the USPS page showing item was in transit. I raised the issue with eBvil eBay asking, if I SHIP an item, as described, is my part of the contract/agreement done. Yes, I was emailed.
That makes sense because when I write something on MY paper, put MY stamp, use MY envelope and write your name on it, and mail it, the moment it drops in the mailbox it is YOURS. I cannot even get it back from the mailman 30 sconds later saying I made a mistake even if my picture and photo ID are printed on the envelope. The item is YOURS and hence if it is lost, it is for you to take up with the USPS.
Not so this guy. He refused to cooperate, refused to even talk on the phone to figure out where the package went. (USPS guy told me it's even possible item was dropped off without the postal worker scanning it properly).
End result. The guy goes to PayPal, complains about it and PayPal, a pathetic part of the eBvil Empire of eBay follows a SEPARATE policy from its parent and refunds the money to that guy. These PayPal bastards had charged ME for the postage and label and transcation fees but knew they can pull money from my account even though by THEIR OWN PARENT COMPANY's policy, I completed the deal. (That is racketeering in my opinion and if you have a similar experience, please post it here).
So, even after the Texas buyer gets his money back from PayPal - which extorts it out of account holder like me - while eBay told me I had completed my part of the deal, he leaves me negative feedback, which of course I was happy to reciprocate.
But the point is that eBvil eBay screws people whose accounts or money are stuck with them, by having two policies separate for eBay and Paypal. It would be like an airline selling you a refundable ticket but the parent company saying oh, our subsidiary says refunds allowed but we don't refund, sorry.
Therefore, if you insist on using eBay, then here are some ideas.
0. Avoid eBay.
1. Try to set up your own storefront. eBay in the long run is going to be like, and die like, AOL. As someone often ripped off my AOL charges in the past, you have no idea how delighted I am to see it going to AOHELL. What happened at AOL will happen at eBay. As people mature in know how, the will move to their own stores, leaving eBvil behind. It's already happening as more and more ISPs are offering storefronts, banks are offering credit card purchasing, and micropayment schemes become more prevalent.
2. If you do sell something on eBay, insist on insurance to be bought by the buyer.
3. Or add a specific line in your listings... if insurance not purcashed, buyer responsible for items lost or damaged in transit.
4. Print labels from USPS web site instead of paypal.
5. Use FedEx 3 days, MUCH better company than USPiss or even (Screw)UPS.
I really have nothing nice to say about eBay after some experiences. I bought stuff from merchants that eBay listed in one of their highlight pages. Got crap, left negative feedback for the seller (I was not the only one) but also raised the issue with eBay but they did not bother to remove the people from their favored lists. No response.
I had a perfect 100% rating. I sold an item to someone and shipped the item certified by USPS as advertised on the listing page. He paid by paypal (now a part of the eBvil Empire) AND I used their stupid system to pay for postage and print the label. Delivered the item to the post office. USPS lost the item. Buyer did NOT buy or ask for insurance.
When item did not get to him he complained that I did not ship. I sent him the USPS page showing item was in transit. I raised the issue with eBvil eBay asking, if I SHIP an item, as described, is my part of the contract/agreement done. Yes, I was emailed.
That makes sense because when I write something on MY paper, put MY stamp, use MY envelope and write your name on it, and mail it, the moment it drops in the mailbox it is YOURS. I cannot even get it back from the mailman 30 sconds later saying I made a mistake even if my picture and photo ID are printed on the envelope. The item is YOURS and hence if it is lost, it is for you to take up with the USPS.
Not so this guy. He refused to cooperate, refused to even talk on the phone to figure out where the package went. (USPS guy told me it's even possible item was dropped off without the postal worker scanning it properly).
End result. The guy goes to PayPal, complains about it and PayPal, a pathetic part of the eBvil Empire of eBay follows a SEPARATE policy from its parent and refunds the money to that guy. These PayPal bastards had charged ME for the postage and label and transcation fees but knew they can pull money from my account even though by THEIR OWN PARENT COMPANY's policy, I completed the deal. (That is racketeering in my opinion and if you have a similar experience, please post it here).
So, even after the Texas buyer gets his money back from PayPal - which extorts it out of account holder like me - while eBay told me I had completed my part of the deal, he leaves me negative feedback, which of course I was happy to reciprocate.
But the point is that eBvil eBay screws people whose accounts or money are stuck with them, by having two policies separate for eBay and Paypal. It would be like an airline selling you a refundable ticket but the parent company saying oh, our subsidiary says refunds allowed but we don't refund, sorry.
Therefore, if you insist on using eBay, then here are some ideas.
0. Avoid eBay.
1. Try to set up your own storefront. eBay in the long run is going to be like, and die like, AOL. As someone often ripped off my AOL charges in the past, you have no idea how delighted I am to see it going to AOHELL. What happened at AOL will happen at eBay. As people mature in know how, the will move to their own stores, leaving eBvil behind. It's already happening as more and more ISPs are offering storefronts, banks are offering credit card purchasing, and micropayment schemes become more prevalent.
2. If you do sell something on eBay, insist on insurance to be bought by the buyer.
3. Or add a specific line in your listings... if insurance not purcashed, buyer responsible for items lost or damaged in transit.
4. Print labels from USPS web site instead of paypal.
5. Use FedEx 3 days, MUCH better company than USPiss or even (Screw)UPS.
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
To Buy Or Not To Buy: Microsoft's ZUNE, Out Of Tune (With Customer Needs)
Microsoft just announced a revolutionary new product... yes, it took them FIVE YEARS of trying to copy Apple's iconic iPod music player to come out with... are you sitting down... a player named ZUNE. It will be available in very original colors --- Black, White and, are you sitting down again... BROWN? I guess they are trying to ensure all skin colors are represented. Though I wonder if that means a Yellow model is still to be announced? What about Red? But, I digress on the path of Survivor, the TV show.
Here's my take on Zune.
Apple knew the Zune announcement was coming... I mean, it's not like five years is not enough time even for Microsoft to copy something. So Apple announced minor tweaks to iPod, e.g. going to 80GB.
Zune's uninspiring announcement means Apple can delay further ipod announcements. Or, here's my feeling, they may make a new announcement in October, in time for Christmas shopping season. Perhaps a bigger screen, more likely a landscape layout so videos can be enjoyed bigger than the 2.5" screen they have at present.
By the way, I find it amusing that the Microsoft player has a THREE inch screen --- bigger than Apple's, but Microsoft will not be offering movies etc. on it. So, in five years, they can't even copy Apple's current level of service/product/offering.
Meantime, here's why I don't expect to be buying a Zune at all.
On the iPod, music listening is a PERSONAL experience. I see dozens of iPod users, including friends, daily, but don't stop to ask what they have on their ipod.
So, why would I buy Zune? To hope it sells millions of units and then have enough people in the market, so there are enough people I run into every day who use it? Then I have to hope I can run into someone and say "Hey can you wirelessly share some tunes with me?"
But how practical is that? How do I find out what of their, persumably, 10000 songs I don't have, need and want to exchange? Doh. So, in the long run, I see Zune being bottom of the heap, and bottom of the list... and not just because of a stupid name start with the letter Z.
What do you think? Would you leave your iPod for a Zune?
Here's my take on Zune.
Apple knew the Zune announcement was coming... I mean, it's not like five years is not enough time even for Microsoft to copy something. So Apple announced minor tweaks to iPod, e.g. going to 80GB.
Zune's uninspiring announcement means Apple can delay further ipod announcements. Or, here's my feeling, they may make a new announcement in October, in time for Christmas shopping season. Perhaps a bigger screen, more likely a landscape layout so videos can be enjoyed bigger than the 2.5" screen they have at present.
By the way, I find it amusing that the Microsoft player has a THREE inch screen --- bigger than Apple's, but Microsoft will not be offering movies etc. on it. So, in five years, they can't even copy Apple's current level of service/product/offering.
Meantime, here's why I don't expect to be buying a Zune at all.
On the iPod, music listening is a PERSONAL experience. I see dozens of iPod users, including friends, daily, but don't stop to ask what they have on their ipod.
So, why would I buy Zune? To hope it sells millions of units and then have enough people in the market, so there are enough people I run into every day who use it? Then I have to hope I can run into someone and say "Hey can you wirelessly share some tunes with me?"
But how practical is that? How do I find out what of their, persumably, 10000 songs I don't have, need and want to exchange? Doh. So, in the long run, I see Zune being bottom of the heap, and bottom of the list... and not just because of a stupid name start with the letter Z.
What do you think? Would you leave your iPod for a Zune?
Sunday, September 17, 2006
"Infallible" Pope Makes Mistake, Issues Sorry "Apology"
I am not one easily offended, and especially not going to allow just anybody's comments about any topic drive me to burn buildings, kill people, etc.
I have great respect for my Christian (non-crusading Bush-loving Bible-thumping, Iraq-bombing celebrating) friends, and nothing but kind words for my alma mater, and Catholic teachers like the late nun Sister Mary Frances of St. Paul's High School, Karachi, Pakistan. They serve more Pakistani people than all the mullahs combined. And, I feel sympathy for the position of anger and risk they must now face. But, let's start at the beginning.
I had found the previous controversy about cartoons of Prophet Muhammad in Danish newspapers just beginning to die down (though on average I get several new readers of my piece on the topic every day) when this "infallible" Pope (who if I recall correctly was a member of the Nazi organization!) had to stir up a hornet's nest.
These were comments by the POPE, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, more than one BILLION people.
Unlike comments against Islam or Muslims by small-time low-life bigots with big-sounding positions, like Tunku Varadarajan (who liberally uses the power given to him my the Wall Street Journal's Paul Gigot), apparently a Hindu of Indian-descent, who regularly inserts anti-Islam comments and obviously bigoted anti-Muslim comments into whatever he can manage to write (even if he is writing about the game of Cricket or that piece of work bigoted Oriana Fallaci!), or the ugly and despicable Mortimer Zuckerman, a parasite of American business who influences American media and policy to align American policies with Zionist needs, or many others like that. {On a separate note, I have personally discussed Tunku's REGULAR Islam bashing and bigotry problem with Paul Gigot via email and in person but it seems he couldn't care less how Muslims are maligned regularly on the editorial pages of the Journal. Tell me I am wrong, Paul Gigot.}
We found out some interesting things from this episode.
One, Apparently the hypocrisy exhibited by the defenders of "free speech" cartoonists (who kept quiet when a British historian was IMPRISONED for questioning or denying the so-called holocaust) has shifted South from Denmark to Rome. This Catholic Church was the one that started Crusades, spreading Christianity on the blade of the sword, spilling blood in the name of Jesus Christ, raping, pillaging, burning alive people, yet seems to be the one commenting on whether Islam (which CLEARLY states for all to READ, "there is no compulsion in religion") was forced upon people by the sword.
Two, the supposedly "infallible" Pope can make mistakes by opening his big Nazi mouth.
Three, the Pope is supposed to be some sort of special agent of God --- after all, he decides what Christians can or cannot do in their daily lives, even what they can or cannot believe. Yet, news reports show that the Pope is not supposed to be writing his own speeches but some sort of committee decides what he should say... This is the first time a major religion has a whole committee directly working with God. No wonder God had to take on three forms just to deal with the extra work. I am impressed. We Muslims only got ONE Prophet to get the message from ONE God, and even that via ONE angel (Gabriel). Damn these Catholics, they got to have God get cloned into three, have a man (Pope) have direct connection with God over the past 2000 years AND now have a whole committee that must be talking to angels or God directly. No wonder they have no time to deal with such petty matters as pedophile priests.
Four, and this is most interesting, the Pope can learn to manipulate the language better than Bill Clinton could. The Pope issued the sorriest excuse of an apology I have ever seen in recent world events. He has expressed regret at the reaction of the Muslims around the world, and that is the key. He did not apologize for what he said. He did not regret his implied or stated meaning, He regrets how people reacted to him. So, I can say Hitler was great, and did a great thing with his concentration camps, and if Jews are mad at me, I can express regret at THEIR reaction, without taking back my own words.
In any case, in my humble opinion, the Nazi Pope was dumb to have said what he said, and dumber if he believes people should or will fall for this apology. Muslims who reacted to his stupidity with attacks on churches are even more stupid.
I do not think the Pope asked Christians to bomb mosques - rotten, evil, vile, dumb, dog-bearded, chanting, repugnant, hell-deserving, so-called Muslims (in Iraq, Pakistan, etc.) do that on their own, thank you very much.
The Fuehrer Pope did not ask America to start bombing Iraq that had nothing to do with 9/11 or anything --- God's other local representative His (Ass)Holiness George W. Bush did that on his own with guidance from Zionazis like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, with encouragement from idiots like Pat(hetic) Robertson. So, burning churches or (if it was related) the murder of a nun is not just dumb, but evil, murder, also.
Let us leave that work to the POPE - Protector of Pedophile Evildoers.
Heil Pope!
Imran
I have great respect for my Christian (non-crusading Bush-loving Bible-thumping, Iraq-bombing celebrating) friends, and nothing but kind words for my alma mater, and Catholic teachers like the late nun Sister Mary Frances of St. Paul's High School, Karachi, Pakistan. They serve more Pakistani people than all the mullahs combined. And, I feel sympathy for the position of anger and risk they must now face. But, let's start at the beginning.
I had found the previous controversy about cartoons of Prophet Muhammad in Danish newspapers just beginning to die down (though on average I get several new readers of my piece on the topic every day) when this "infallible" Pope (who if I recall correctly was a member of the Nazi organization!) had to stir up a hornet's nest.
These were comments by the POPE, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, more than one BILLION people.
Unlike comments against Islam or Muslims by small-time low-life bigots with big-sounding positions, like Tunku Varadarajan (who liberally uses the power given to him my the Wall Street Journal's Paul Gigot), apparently a Hindu of Indian-descent, who regularly inserts anti-Islam comments and obviously bigoted anti-Muslim comments into whatever he can manage to write (even if he is writing about the game of Cricket or that piece of work bigoted Oriana Fallaci!), or the ugly and despicable Mortimer Zuckerman, a parasite of American business who influences American media and policy to align American policies with Zionist needs, or many others like that. {On a separate note, I have personally discussed Tunku's REGULAR Islam bashing and bigotry problem with Paul Gigot via email and in person but it seems he couldn't care less how Muslims are maligned regularly on the editorial pages of the Journal. Tell me I am wrong, Paul Gigot.}
We found out some interesting things from this episode.
One, Apparently the hypocrisy exhibited by the defenders of "free speech" cartoonists (who kept quiet when a British historian was IMPRISONED for questioning or denying the so-called holocaust) has shifted South from Denmark to Rome. This Catholic Church was the one that started Crusades, spreading Christianity on the blade of the sword, spilling blood in the name of Jesus Christ, raping, pillaging, burning alive people, yet seems to be the one commenting on whether Islam (which CLEARLY states for all to READ, "there is no compulsion in religion") was forced upon people by the sword.
Two, the supposedly "infallible" Pope can make mistakes by opening his big Nazi mouth.
Three, the Pope is supposed to be some sort of special agent of God --- after all, he decides what Christians can or cannot do in their daily lives, even what they can or cannot believe. Yet, news reports show that the Pope is not supposed to be writing his own speeches but some sort of committee decides what he should say... This is the first time a major religion has a whole committee directly working with God. No wonder God had to take on three forms just to deal with the extra work. I am impressed. We Muslims only got ONE Prophet to get the message from ONE God, and even that via ONE angel (Gabriel). Damn these Catholics, they got to have God get cloned into three, have a man (Pope) have direct connection with God over the past 2000 years AND now have a whole committee that must be talking to angels or God directly. No wonder they have no time to deal with such petty matters as pedophile priests.
Four, and this is most interesting, the Pope can learn to manipulate the language better than Bill Clinton could. The Pope issued the sorriest excuse of an apology I have ever seen in recent world events. He has expressed regret at the reaction of the Muslims around the world, and that is the key. He did not apologize for what he said. He did not regret his implied or stated meaning, He regrets how people reacted to him. So, I can say Hitler was great, and did a great thing with his concentration camps, and if Jews are mad at me, I can express regret at THEIR reaction, without taking back my own words.
In any case, in my humble opinion, the Nazi Pope was dumb to have said what he said, and dumber if he believes people should or will fall for this apology. Muslims who reacted to his stupidity with attacks on churches are even more stupid.
I do not think the Pope asked Christians to bomb mosques - rotten, evil, vile, dumb, dog-bearded, chanting, repugnant, hell-deserving, so-called Muslims (in Iraq, Pakistan, etc.) do that on their own, thank you very much.
The Fuehrer Pope did not ask America to start bombing Iraq that had nothing to do with 9/11 or anything --- God's other local representative His (Ass)Holiness George W. Bush did that on his own with guidance from Zionazis like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, with encouragement from idiots like Pat(hetic) Robertson. So, burning churches or (if it was related) the murder of a nun is not just dumb, but evil, murder, also.
Let us leave that work to the POPE - Protector of Pedophile Evildoers.
Heil Pope!
Imran
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Five Years Zero Results
I had been travelling extensively the last few weeks, so I missed most of the hand-wringing, emotional, heart-tugging documentaries, news reports, Presidential "speech" and other useless activities on TV. Useless, totally useless, as far as learning any real lessons from September 11, 2001. The events of that day were politicized, being used for election-related grandstanding, yet FIVE YEARS later, Osama/Usama Bin Laden is still alive and well, active and busy, and not only showing videotapes of his meeting the 9/11 hijackers but even planning and exhorting Muslims to carry out more attacks. George Bush, Five Years, Zero Results, Greater Threats, All Around. Feel safer?
Monday, August 21, 2006
'Art Of The Start' & Getting Trademark Approved By USPTO
Guy Kawasaki is a well known VC, author, former Apple Fellow, Mac evangelist, and many other things. I have known him by email for a decade and had a delightful meeting with him a few weeks ago. He writes a really interesting and educational blog, for anyone wanting to succeed, to do a new business, start a new company, and his book ART OF THE START is a great way for entrepreneurs or people starting ANYTHING new to do the best job they can. (DISCLAIMER: I have the honor of being mentioned in the credits of the book, and Guy did send me a free copy then, but I also bought some later and gave to friends. You really should get a copy.)
Anyway, one of the topics that Guy wrote about in his blog was getting Trademark protection from the US Patent and Trademark Office. I had just gone through a bit of an experience on that, so I shared it with his readers. I wrote:
"Just because you did a good search and found valid examples of trademarks that should enable you to corner a particular type of phrase, the trademark office is stupidly inconsistent.
I have a file open there right now, and had them reject (or demand to change/agree to release exclusive claim to) a set of words that NO ONE else is using in their marks AND the USPTO has issued similar TYPES of phrase for others.
e.g. I wanted "Secretary On Demand", for my NETretary.com service, they refused, but ONLY cited magazine articles citing words like "outsourced help when needed", "help available on demand" etc.
Despite my insistence, the examiner who called me was unable to give an answer for why they had no problem issuing "FUEL ON DEMAND" as a trademark (and many other such examples)! Isn't EVERY gas station in the world providing fuel on demand? She could not answer that. Doh.
Inconsistency, thy name is USPTO."
A few days later, I got the expected note from the USPTO (whose examiner had been very polite and courteous when I spoke to her on the phone) telling me why they would not allow my application as is, though they gave even more generic names to other companies. That in itself was not unusual. What annoyed me was that during this time, the USPTO shamlessly sells my name and information to patent attorneys and other purveyors of services, who, for a few thousand Dollars, will probably get approval for me what I, as a law-abiding, rule-following applicant was refused.
Growing up in Pakistan I recall how government departments would have complex policies forcing people to find "middlemen" to pay to get things done. That sleazy practice is best seen at work in NY's (and I am sure other states') traffic courts (e.g. in one place you have to show up like 5 AM to get a chance to get IN just to get a chance to be heard... )
AND even before terror alerts, they did not allow cell phones OR laptops, basically ensuring that no one with precious time would want to go through the process. Not surprisingly, right outside reps of Traffic Court attorneys were handing out cards. I recall, I had actually been pulled over and ticketed ( hare Nassau county cops) for "missing a yield sign" half a mile from where the cop pulled me over.
A few days later I happened to go by the area and realized... there was NO yield sign at that spot. I had been falsely ticketed. Yet, I had to go to court with the photo to prove that. I got there at 8 AM and found 200 people ahead of me, and was told, no laptop, no cell phone and I had to stand in the sun waiting to get INSIDE and would most likely have to wait until 5 PM or so.
Frustrated, I took a lawyer's card, called him, sent him the info, and after giving my credit card number, I waited. A few weeks later, I got a letter confirming that my ticket had been thrown out... and that simple act of justice cost me nearly $300 in attorney fees, not to mention time and hassle of having one to stand in line that first day. Who knows how that $300 got divided up.. I am sure the attorneys don't give the judge $150 to do what they would have done anyway, had I stood there 10 hours waiting for my turn.
I would not be surprised if this nefarious system works with the government departments making it impossible for people to get justice or action, and grudgingly paying hundreds of Dollars to the lawyers, who probably spend some of that money wining and dining the officials, or playing Golf with them....
At least, to the credit of Pakistanis, they cut out these middlemen. You pay the "baksheesh" directly and get the work done working straight with the damned judge or bureaucrat. Saves time for everyone without enriching the lawyers, doesn't it.
What do you think? Do you have an example of how the system is designed for citizens to be forced feed a nefarious system based on backdoor dealmakers?
Anyway, one of the topics that Guy wrote about in his blog was getting Trademark protection from the US Patent and Trademark Office. I had just gone through a bit of an experience on that, so I shared it with his readers. I wrote:
"Just because you did a good search and found valid examples of trademarks that should enable you to corner a particular type of phrase, the trademark office is stupidly inconsistent.
I have a file open there right now, and had them reject (or demand to change/agree to release exclusive claim to) a set of words that NO ONE else is using in their marks AND the USPTO has issued similar TYPES of phrase for others.
e.g. I wanted "Secretary On Demand", for my NETretary.com service, they refused, but ONLY cited magazine articles citing words like "outsourced help when needed", "help available on demand" etc.
Despite my insistence, the examiner who called me was unable to give an answer for why they had no problem issuing "FUEL ON DEMAND" as a trademark (and many other such examples)! Isn't EVERY gas station in the world providing fuel on demand? She could not answer that. Doh.
Inconsistency, thy name is USPTO."
A few days later, I got the expected note from the USPTO (whose examiner had been very polite and courteous when I spoke to her on the phone) telling me why they would not allow my application as is, though they gave even more generic names to other companies. That in itself was not unusual. What annoyed me was that during this time, the USPTO shamlessly sells my name and information to patent attorneys and other purveyors of services, who, for a few thousand Dollars, will probably get approval for me what I, as a law-abiding, rule-following applicant was refused.
Growing up in Pakistan I recall how government departments would have complex policies forcing people to find "middlemen" to pay to get things done. That sleazy practice is best seen at work in NY's (and I am sure other states') traffic courts (e.g. in one place you have to show up like 5 AM to get a chance to get IN just to get a chance to be heard... )
AND even before terror alerts, they did not allow cell phones OR laptops, basically ensuring that no one with precious time would want to go through the process. Not surprisingly, right outside reps of Traffic Court attorneys were handing out cards. I recall, I had actually been pulled over and ticketed ( hare Nassau county cops) for "missing a yield sign" half a mile from where the cop pulled me over.
A few days later I happened to go by the area and realized... there was NO yield sign at that spot. I had been falsely ticketed. Yet, I had to go to court with the photo to prove that. I got there at 8 AM and found 200 people ahead of me, and was told, no laptop, no cell phone and I had to stand in the sun waiting to get INSIDE and would most likely have to wait until 5 PM or so.
Frustrated, I took a lawyer's card, called him, sent him the info, and after giving my credit card number, I waited. A few weeks later, I got a letter confirming that my ticket had been thrown out... and that simple act of justice cost me nearly $300 in attorney fees, not to mention time and hassle of having one to stand in line that first day. Who knows how that $300 got divided up.. I am sure the attorneys don't give the judge $150 to do what they would have done anyway, had I stood there 10 hours waiting for my turn.
I would not be surprised if this nefarious system works with the government departments making it impossible for people to get justice or action, and grudgingly paying hundreds of Dollars to the lawyers, who probably spend some of that money wining and dining the officials, or playing Golf with them....
At least, to the credit of Pakistanis, they cut out these middlemen. You pay the "baksheesh" directly and get the work done working straight with the damned judge or bureaucrat. Saves time for everyone without enriching the lawyers, doesn't it.
What do you think? Do you have an example of how the system is designed for citizens to be forced feed a nefarious system based on backdoor dealmakers?
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Lawless, Warrantless, Clueless, Hopeless Bush Wiretapping Illegal
Just this minute I heard the incredibly wonderful news that made me proud to be an American.
Our founding fathers, while probably worried in their graves about the grave future of our nation under Bush ("The Decider" "The UnderTaker"?), must be smiling to finally see the judciary sit up and protect the separation of powers, the freedoms our country stands for, our constitution and our rights.
A judge has declared the Bush administrations wiretapping of all of us Americans illegal, a grave setback for the ChriStalinist regime that is the administration of Holy Farter George W. Bush and his Church of ProfitOILogy.
ChriStalinist (and ChriStalinism) is a(re) new word(s) I have coined in 2006, to counter the false phrase Islamofascism being foisted on us. ChriStalinism represents people claiming to do the work of Christ and Christianity but acting like Stalin fascists, imprisoning people without trial, saying torture is OK, spying on their own civilian people illegally, punishing people who speak against the junta, invading countries, etc.
God Bless America, its Constitution, and its judiciary. One day, I hope, the Congress will wake up too, and make us the United States of America, again, instead of the CHRISTalinist State of Busherica.
Our founding fathers, while probably worried in their graves about the grave future of our nation under Bush ("The Decider" "The UnderTaker"?), must be smiling to finally see the judciary sit up and protect the separation of powers, the freedoms our country stands for, our constitution and our rights.
A judge has declared the Bush administrations wiretapping of all of us Americans illegal, a grave setback for the ChriStalinist regime that is the administration of Holy Farter George W. Bush and his Church of ProfitOILogy.
ChriStalinist (and ChriStalinism) is a(re) new word(s) I have coined in 2006, to counter the false phrase Islamofascism being foisted on us. ChriStalinism represents people claiming to do the work of Christ and Christianity but acting like Stalin fascists, imprisoning people without trial, saying torture is OK, spying on their own civilian people illegally, punishing people who speak against the junta, invading countries, etc.
God Bless America, its Constitution, and its judiciary. One day, I hope, the Congress will wake up too, and make us the United States of America, again, instead of the CHRISTalinist State of Busherica.
Saturday, August 12, 2006
To Buy Or Not To Buy: Nikon D80 vs. SONY Minolta-based DSLR Alpha
I had sworn off buying SONY products because of their shoving the unnecessary and more expensive than the popular SD cards Memory Stick in all their products. It's as if SONY never learns from their BetaMax mistakes.
I have bought several Nikons, from the great Coolpix 5700 (see some of the pics taken from the 5700 at http://imran.com ) and also the S5 and Wi-Fi S6, and love them. The picture quality, the shades of color they can capture, of sunsets and blue skies, of skin and hair, are amazing.
But I still have lots of investment in my old but great Minolta Maxxum 7000i (1991 or so) and lenses. When Konica Minolta shut down their operations and sold the camera business to SONY, I knew SONY would make decent cameras but if they had Memory Sticks and didn't do better than Nikon D70 models, I was likely to go with Nikon, or with the higher model Canon.
Then, SONY surprised me with the launch of their new Minolta based Alpha 100 DSLR at 10.2 Megapixels AND a price that will be comparable to Nikon and Canon cameras of lower resolution. (August 24, 2006 Canon has released as similar camera EOS Kiss Digital X in Japan and Rebel XTi in the United States in the 10 MP under $800 price range, but I do not believe it offers built in image stabilization).
On top of that, the camera has image stabilization built-in (as Minoltas did) so all my old Minolta Maxxum lenses benefit from IS without any additional cost to me.
And, SONY actually decided to not make Memory Sticks the required memory card for the camera... and that has got me seriously considering finally getting a SONY (other than a Sony Ericsson P900 mobile phone that I love --- though NEVER bought a single Memory Stick for above the 48MB or whatever it came with).
If you are looking at the New Nikon D80, I would stronly urge you to also take a look at the SONY DSLR before you make a decision, unless you have a Nikon investment in lenses and equipment. Check these comparisons.
While you are here, do check some other items of interest.
I have bought several Nikons, from the great Coolpix 5700 (see some of the pics taken from the 5700 at http://imran.com ) and also the S5 and Wi-Fi S6, and love them. The picture quality, the shades of color they can capture, of sunsets and blue skies, of skin and hair, are amazing.
But I still have lots of investment in my old but great Minolta Maxxum 7000i (1991 or so) and lenses. When Konica Minolta shut down their operations and sold the camera business to SONY, I knew SONY would make decent cameras but if they had Memory Sticks and didn't do better than Nikon D70 models, I was likely to go with Nikon, or with the higher model Canon.
Then, SONY surprised me with the launch of their new Minolta based Alpha 100 DSLR at 10.2 Megapixels AND a price that will be comparable to Nikon and Canon cameras of lower resolution. (August 24, 2006 Canon has released as similar camera EOS Kiss Digital X in Japan and Rebel XTi in the United States in the 10 MP under $800 price range, but I do not believe it offers built in image stabilization).
On top of that, the camera has image stabilization built-in (as Minoltas did) so all my old Minolta Maxxum lenses benefit from IS without any additional cost to me.
And, SONY actually decided to not make Memory Sticks the required memory card for the camera... and that has got me seriously considering finally getting a SONY (other than a Sony Ericsson P900 mobile phone that I love --- though NEVER bought a single Memory Stick for above the 48MB or whatever it came with).
If you are looking at the New Nikon D80, I would stronly urge you to also take a look at the SONY DSLR before you make a decision, unless you have a Nikon investment in lenses and equipment. Check these comparisons.
While you are here, do check some other items of interest.
Thursday, August 10, 2006
More On Morons
I was woken up early this morning by a call to be interviewed on a popular radio show with Patrick Shiels in Michigan, on the Big Show. He is a great guy to be on air with, because, unlike many talk-radio hosts, he does not shout, posture, or pontificate. We had a great conversation about various topics.
The primary topic I want to write on is more on the morons in the news today.
The first set of morons is the bunch of (presumably) Muslim nutjobs in England, who were planning to blow up a bunch of airliners using liquid explosives or explosives concealed in liquids. Ironically, what surprised me was the surprise law enforcement expressed at this possible mechanism, because I recall having chatted with someone in law enforcement 2 years ago about a movie script where terrorists conceal C4 or such explosives inside tampered Pepsi Cola or Coke cans.
I have another movie script in my head that involves another idea, which, in the interest of national security, I am going to share with some of my law enforcement (FBI, NYPD and SCPD) and government (State Dept.) contacts just so they are aware of what new mechanism the terrorists may use. Darn, there goes my chance of writing the next Die Hard 23 movie script. I wonder if the government will sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement.
The second moron is Pat Robertson, who is in Israel and Occupied Palestine, telling Israelis he and HE (God) stand with them in their fight against Lebanon. I would love to have Mr. Christian Televangelist:
a) ask the Zionists if they believe in Jesus Christ as a Holy Prophet and the Virgin Mary --- as the Christian and Muslim Lebanese do, whom the Zionists are bombing and killing with America-rushed guided bombs?
b) tell the Jews that Pat Robertson sells his clientele on the second coming (of more money to him) etc. but that it requires the Jews to be "saved" and made to "believe" and other such wonderful things that the many versions of the Bible teach?
c) talk about his large real estate and tourism project that will make him millions?
Hmmmm... It's not surprising to see illiterate Muslims in poor countries believing whatever a whackjob Mullah tells them as being the word of God, but when educated Americans spend hard earned money on Pat Jerk Robertson hoping for Armageddon to happen soon, instead of trying to make the world a better place.... it just makes me say, "Doh."
The primary topic I want to write on is more on the morons in the news today.
The first set of morons is the bunch of (presumably) Muslim nutjobs in England, who were planning to blow up a bunch of airliners using liquid explosives or explosives concealed in liquids. Ironically, what surprised me was the surprise law enforcement expressed at this possible mechanism, because I recall having chatted with someone in law enforcement 2 years ago about a movie script where terrorists conceal C4 or such explosives inside tampered Pepsi Cola or Coke cans.
I have another movie script in my head that involves another idea, which, in the interest of national security, I am going to share with some of my law enforcement (FBI, NYPD and SCPD) and government (State Dept.) contacts just so they are aware of what new mechanism the terrorists may use. Darn, there goes my chance of writing the next Die Hard 23 movie script. I wonder if the government will sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement.
The second moron is Pat Robertson, who is in Israel and Occupied Palestine, telling Israelis he and HE (God) stand with them in their fight against Lebanon. I would love to have Mr. Christian Televangelist:
a) ask the Zionists if they believe in Jesus Christ as a Holy Prophet and the Virgin Mary --- as the Christian and Muslim Lebanese do, whom the Zionists are bombing and killing with America-rushed guided bombs?
b) tell the Jews that Pat Robertson sells his clientele on the second coming (of more money to him) etc. but that it requires the Jews to be "saved" and made to "believe" and other such wonderful things that the many versions of the Bible teach?
c) talk about his large real estate and tourism project that will make him millions?
Hmmmm... It's not surprising to see illiterate Muslims in poor countries believing whatever a whackjob Mullah tells them as being the word of God, but when educated Americans spend hard earned money on Pat Jerk Robertson hoping for Armageddon to happen soon, instead of trying to make the world a better place.... it just makes me say, "Doh."
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
To Buy Or Not To Buy: PhotoCo PhotoShare7 Digital Pic Frame - Probably NOT
This is just a Quick comment on the PhotoShare7, a sleek, ipod-like 7" digital picture frame I saw at Staples in Patchogue for $99.99. I was about to jump on the opportunity to buy that as a gift for my Dad's upcoming birthday and put in a 2GB SD card, so he could have constantly changing pictures of a lifetime of happiness and family life. But, I ended up holding back. Here are the questions I still do not have answers for, and you should keep in mind before you buy this item.
I just left a voicemail for the people at Photoco that make/sell them. It's cool to see iPod like design in a device but to carry it over into the sparsely worded packaging is stupid. The box for an item that is not very well understood by customers should have a little more info and useful info at that.
Their box does not even state a URL or web site for the company that makes it. It does not state if there is an upper limit on the capacity of SD-card it can take. (This can be an issue as new cards come out, these (2006) days 2GB SD cards can be had for under $50. e.g., I have a great Nikon 5700 camera for which I splurged on a 4GB MicroDrive only to find the camera only handles 1GB cards).
The box does not state the resolution of the screen, which most sites briefly mention as an issue, but there is no more concrete info. I am sure the low price must be a factor of that, because the quality of a 7" photo at 320x240 vs. 640x480 is going to be significantly different. Another thing, I noticed a similar unit at an auto-dealer the other day. I was immediately struck by the poor contrast, washed out colors and overall low quality image of that unit. It was NOT a PhotoCo frame BUT, if they were made by Far East or Chinese manufacturers from the same technology, it would be enough to hold me back.
The worst part is, I did find a web site for these people, http://photoco.com, and they seem to be in Ohio. I have nothing but a negative impression of the company itself. They have an 800-number, but no one answers. I have left 3 voicemails, and got no response. There isn't even a single more bit of information on the whole WEB SITE than there is on the sparse package text. So, I had the Staples people put back on the shelf the PhotoShare7 unit I had wanted to buy and write a more detailed review on. If the company does not even bother to respond to NEW customers asking to BUY, I wonder what quality one can expect from the product, or in customer support queries.
The idea is great - though hardly new. The design is sleek - though iPod-ripoff like. The price is great - though I can't be sure if its actual quality is worth that price. It comes with great accessories, but without having more info, I cannot recommend anyone buy it except where the convenience, gadget factor, quick and inexpensive gift nature of it is useful.
- Update: Finally, on my third call, a woman answered, who had NO idea about the product. She said she would find someone. The guy called back in a very laid back tone, as if doing me a favor. Apparently this company is a subsidiary of Samsonite, which I found an interesting and not totally unrelated strategic expansion of the travel theme. The product is said to have a resolution of 480x234 or something weird like that, which suggests my initial impression was correct, that the picture would be stretched out of proportion. The guy said it can take any available SD card (which currently are at 4GB in 2006). I asked if the pictures should be stored on the card from the Apple Macintosh MacOS or other PC at appropriate resolution or would the firmware of the frame simply load up a 5MP image and display it appropriately resized to the size of the frame, and he said that is what would happen. That's the latest as of August 15, 2006.
I just left a voicemail for the people at Photoco that make/sell them. It's cool to see iPod like design in a device but to carry it over into the sparsely worded packaging is stupid. The box for an item that is not very well understood by customers should have a little more info and useful info at that.
Their box does not even state a URL or web site for the company that makes it. It does not state if there is an upper limit on the capacity of SD-card it can take. (This can be an issue as new cards come out, these (2006) days 2GB SD cards can be had for under $50. e.g., I have a great Nikon 5700 camera for which I splurged on a 4GB MicroDrive only to find the camera only handles 1GB cards).
The box does not state the resolution of the screen, which most sites briefly mention as an issue, but there is no more concrete info. I am sure the low price must be a factor of that, because the quality of a 7" photo at 320x240 vs. 640x480 is going to be significantly different. Another thing, I noticed a similar unit at an auto-dealer the other day. I was immediately struck by the poor contrast, washed out colors and overall low quality image of that unit. It was NOT a PhotoCo frame BUT, if they were made by Far East or Chinese manufacturers from the same technology, it would be enough to hold me back.
The worst part is, I did find a web site for these people, http://photoco.com, and they seem to be in Ohio. I have nothing but a negative impression of the company itself. They have an 800-number, but no one answers. I have left 3 voicemails, and got no response. There isn't even a single more bit of information on the whole WEB SITE than there is on the sparse package text. So, I had the Staples people put back on the shelf the PhotoShare7 unit I had wanted to buy and write a more detailed review on. If the company does not even bother to respond to NEW customers asking to BUY, I wonder what quality one can expect from the product, or in customer support queries.
The idea is great - though hardly new. The design is sleek - though iPod-ripoff like. The price is great - though I can't be sure if its actual quality is worth that price. It comes with great accessories, but without having more info, I cannot recommend anyone buy it except where the convenience, gadget factor, quick and inexpensive gift nature of it is useful.
- Update: Finally, on my third call, a woman answered, who had NO idea about the product. She said she would find someone. The guy called back in a very laid back tone, as if doing me a favor. Apparently this company is a subsidiary of Samsonite, which I found an interesting and not totally unrelated strategic expansion of the travel theme. The product is said to have a resolution of 480x234 or something weird like that, which suggests my initial impression was correct, that the picture would be stretched out of proportion. The guy said it can take any available SD card (which currently are at 4GB in 2006). I asked if the pictures should be stored on the card from the Apple Macintosh MacOS or other PC at appropriate resolution or would the firmware of the frame simply load up a 5MP image and display it appropriately resized to the size of the frame, and he said that is what would happen. That's the latest as of August 15, 2006.
Monday, August 07, 2006
We’ll Always Have Paris (Hilton)
It just seems that our favorite famous-for-being-famous celebrity just cannot stay out of the news. First she could not keep new sex tapes from coming out. For a woman who was recently seen wearing $3 MILLION worth of jewelry, it is amazing that she did not pay her bill for a storage locker and the stuff was auctioned off. But the question is, how many sex tapes does this girl have, that she needs a huge storage locker in a warehouse! I guess her story and her video tapes will remain a timely topic for decades to come.
Yet, Paris Hilton appears more hungry for attention than an Ethiopian refugee starving for food after a decade old-famine. She recently claimed she is the "blonde icon" of our times. Now, don't get me wrong, I love blondes. But, it's bimbos I cannot stand.
So many times Ms. Hilton says or does things that make her appear to be the "bimbo icon" of our times. But, a quick analysis of her antics, and even the timing and constant timeliness of her sex-tapes release (more consistent and reliably scheduled than many Hollywood sequels!) suggests that the girl is anything but a bimbo. She is simply a businesswoman cashing everything in, all the time. She may not have Madonna's ability to "re-brand" or "re-engineer" herself, but, in terms of exploiting her station in life and the short shelf life of most celebrities, especially those created out of scandal, Paris Hilton may be forever. Here's what I think about her story.
Once upon a time - until a few years ago, life was simple. You were either born super-wealthy, or you dreamt of becoming filthy rich. Or, as Anna Nicole Smith proved, you hoped to marry a shriveling old billionaire and get all, or almost all, his money when he died. Not having anything better to do with her [ahem] considerable intellectual abilities or, probably, not finding any 10 year olds at her mental level, Anna Nicole had no choice but to put herself out on her own reality TV show.
For those who could only dream of being super rich, and did not have Anna Nicole's "assets", salvation lay in the opportunity to become a movie star. To become a movie star, especially if you were of average talent, you needed to get noticed. There were several ways to get noticed, one of the most effective ones being to get on the cover of a magazine, like Playboy, preferably without your clothes on.
Then came TV, actually, "Reality" TV, which gave average Joes and Janes a chance to make themselves more desirable to that Mister or Miss Right who might be out there, somewhere.
How eating cows' intestines or bulls' eyes or lizards' tails on live national TV makes one more desirable is something I still have not figured out. Then I saw that some of these reality TV "stars" - whose names I cannot remember - took the next logical step.
After reality TV they posed for Playboy and I am sure they are now waiting for their movie roles and eventually a chance to meet the heir to some fortune who will fall in love, or lust, with them. Then, magically, they would turn from airheads int heiresses.
At least that is they way the system used to work. But, as we all know, there is always someone who will come along and spoil a perfectly good system.
I must be the last person with high-speed Internet and computer know-how who still has not seen the now famous video clip of the multi-talented Paris Hilton.
On a side note, it did make me wonder. I mean, would it feel strange to have sex with Paris Hilton - at the Paris Hilton? Anyway, I digress.
Back to what Ms. Hilton did. With one insertion, of the video tape, Paris Hilton has shown that it is also possible to go all the way - in reverse. by starting from being an heiress, to a sex-movie star, and now, on to her own reality show. Who knows, maybe being a reality TV show star is what heiresses aspire to be - when they are not busy making sex-tapes.
So, all of you out there lining up for reality TV slots, hoping to use it to become heiresses some day - remember, it works both ways.
Well-heeled heiresses may want to be in your low-rated shows as much as you may want to be in their high-heeled shoes. To remind us of that, we'll always have Paris (Hilton)!
And that, folks, is In My Humble Opinion. This is Imran Anwar, signing off.
Yet, Paris Hilton appears more hungry for attention than an Ethiopian refugee starving for food after a decade old-famine. She recently claimed she is the "blonde icon" of our times. Now, don't get me wrong, I love blondes. But, it's bimbos I cannot stand.
So many times Ms. Hilton says or does things that make her appear to be the "bimbo icon" of our times. But, a quick analysis of her antics, and even the timing and constant timeliness of her sex-tapes release (more consistent and reliably scheduled than many Hollywood sequels!) suggests that the girl is anything but a bimbo. She is simply a businesswoman cashing everything in, all the time. She may not have Madonna's ability to "re-brand" or "re-engineer" herself, but, in terms of exploiting her station in life and the short shelf life of most celebrities, especially those created out of scandal, Paris Hilton may be forever. Here's what I think about her story.
Once upon a time - until a few years ago, life was simple. You were either born super-wealthy, or you dreamt of becoming filthy rich. Or, as Anna Nicole Smith proved, you hoped to marry a shriveling old billionaire and get all, or almost all, his money when he died. Not having anything better to do with her [ahem] considerable intellectual abilities or, probably, not finding any 10 year olds at her mental level, Anna Nicole had no choice but to put herself out on her own reality TV show.
For those who could only dream of being super rich, and did not have Anna Nicole's "assets", salvation lay in the opportunity to become a movie star. To become a movie star, especially if you were of average talent, you needed to get noticed. There were several ways to get noticed, one of the most effective ones being to get on the cover of a magazine, like Playboy, preferably without your clothes on.
Then came TV, actually, "Reality" TV, which gave average Joes and Janes a chance to make themselves more desirable to that Mister or Miss Right who might be out there, somewhere.
How eating cows' intestines or bulls' eyes or lizards' tails on live national TV makes one more desirable is something I still have not figured out. Then I saw that some of these reality TV "stars" - whose names I cannot remember - took the next logical step.
After reality TV they posed for Playboy and I am sure they are now waiting for their movie roles and eventually a chance to meet the heir to some fortune who will fall in love, or lust, with them. Then, magically, they would turn from airheads int heiresses.
At least that is they way the system used to work. But, as we all know, there is always someone who will come along and spoil a perfectly good system.
I must be the last person with high-speed Internet and computer know-how who still has not seen the now famous video clip of the multi-talented Paris Hilton.
On a side note, it did make me wonder. I mean, would it feel strange to have sex with Paris Hilton - at the Paris Hilton? Anyway, I digress.
Back to what Ms. Hilton did. With one insertion, of the video tape, Paris Hilton has shown that it is also possible to go all the way - in reverse. by starting from being an heiress, to a sex-movie star, and now, on to her own reality show. Who knows, maybe being a reality TV show star is what heiresses aspire to be - when they are not busy making sex-tapes.
So, all of you out there lining up for reality TV slots, hoping to use it to become heiresses some day - remember, it works both ways.
Well-heeled heiresses may want to be in your low-rated shows as much as you may want to be in their high-heeled shoes. To remind us of that, we'll always have Paris (Hilton)!
And that, folks, is In My Humble Opinion. This is Imran Anwar, signing off.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Marlon Brando Bowed, So Will Mel Gibson
I started writing my online web log (before "blogging" came around) more than a decade ago, under the trademarks of "Occasionally Obnoxious Obviously Outspoken Opinions" and short comments under "2 Cent(ence)s Worth".
One of the "big" non-events around that time was the media-forced frenzy over the comments Marlon Brando had made about how Jews controlled Hollywood.
Now news items show that Mel Gibson made some drunken comments against Jews, which he is fast backtracking on. Even a great actor, an institution and legend in his lifetime, Marlon Brando, had to fast rewind and backtrack on what he said. This is what I had written:
-------
MARLON BRANDO BRANDED -
BOWS TO HOLLYWOOD's GODFATHERS
Imran Anwar questions a "Higher Authority" © 1996-2004
(Issues of media influence of pro-Israeli groups continue to this day, and since then neo-Cons, most of them Zionists likeWolfowitz, Perle, etc.Loyall to Israel more than to America, have led Americans into what will be a long term globallydisastrous policy)
As if any proof was needed, the Jewish Mafia in the USA showed its true colors and power recently. Legendary movie star Marlon Brando expressed remorse for his (truthful) opinion that Hollywood is dominated by Jews. He had said that they show every minority group in a negative light but Jews are never shown as villains. I think he had the courage to express the truth, though his choice of words like nigger and kike may not have been appropriate.
This was something I had written just two days before Brando said the same thing. If someone like Brando turned to Jello, and had to backpedal so fast, one can imagine the power that groups like JDL and ADL command over the ordinary day to day working of the media and Hollywood.
We recall when Spike Lee had to spend more time defending his movie than marketing it, a few years ago, when he was accused of anti-Semitism. His crime? The movie had showed two characters who, get a load of this, LOOKED Jewish! Imagine what it would be like if someone made movies in which the criminals were always Hasidim or other Jews, instead of Blacks as criminals, and Muslims as terrorists.
One does not have to subscribe to the politics of Pat Buchanut, I mean, Buchanan, but we have all seen him get hit by the same 'Brand-'em Anti-Semitic' Media Gestapo for criticizing US' blind support of Israel. This happened when he stated, half-jokingly, and, one could argue, quite-truthfully, that the US Congress was also "Israeli Occupied Territory!"
It seems that free speech concepts apply only if someone creates "art" with the Cross of Jesus in a jar of urine, writes a filthy novel about Prophet Mohammad, drapes a toilet bowl with the Flag, or publishes 'research' showing that Blacks are mentally inferior to others. But, apparently, saying something negative, even stating a statistical and clearly known fact, about the number and control of Jews of Hollywood is unacceptable. It is worse than blasphemy.
Marlon Brando should have known that they would first Brand him (anti-Semitic) and then "make him an offer he could not refuse." It was amusing to see the JDL say they would "make his life a living hell" yet no one read anything into this threat. I can imagine the Jew York Times....errr... the NY Times staying as quiet had it been the Iranian government saying they would make someone's life a living hell.
Marlon just realized he would have to apologize to a "higher authority" than God, the Godfathers of Hollywood and the rabid rabbis of the media industry.
--------
So, as I said about Marlon.... Passion of the Gibson will meet the (double) cross(hairs) of Jollywood... and bow down.
One of the "big" non-events around that time was the media-forced frenzy over the comments Marlon Brando had made about how Jews controlled Hollywood.
Now news items show that Mel Gibson made some drunken comments against Jews, which he is fast backtracking on. Even a great actor, an institution and legend in his lifetime, Marlon Brando, had to fast rewind and backtrack on what he said. This is what I had written:
-------
MARLON BRANDO BRANDED -
BOWS TO HOLLYWOOD's GODFATHERS
Imran Anwar questions a "Higher Authority" © 1996-2004
(Issues of media influence of pro-Israeli groups continue to this day, and since then neo-Cons, most of them Zionists likeWolfowitz, Perle, etc.Loyall to Israel more than to America, have led Americans into what will be a long term globallydisastrous policy)
As if any proof was needed, the Jewish Mafia in the USA showed its true colors and power recently. Legendary movie star Marlon Brando expressed remorse for his (truthful) opinion that Hollywood is dominated by Jews. He had said that they show every minority group in a negative light but Jews are never shown as villains. I think he had the courage to express the truth, though his choice of words like nigger and kike may not have been appropriate.
This was something I had written just two days before Brando said the same thing. If someone like Brando turned to Jello, and had to backpedal so fast, one can imagine the power that groups like JDL and ADL command over the ordinary day to day working of the media and Hollywood.
We recall when Spike Lee had to spend more time defending his movie than marketing it, a few years ago, when he was accused of anti-Semitism. His crime? The movie had showed two characters who, get a load of this, LOOKED Jewish! Imagine what it would be like if someone made movies in which the criminals were always Hasidim or other Jews, instead of Blacks as criminals, and Muslims as terrorists.
One does not have to subscribe to the politics of Pat Buchanut, I mean, Buchanan, but we have all seen him get hit by the same 'Brand-'em Anti-Semitic' Media Gestapo for criticizing US' blind support of Israel. This happened when he stated, half-jokingly, and, one could argue, quite-truthfully, that the US Congress was also "Israeli Occupied Territory!"
It seems that free speech concepts apply only if someone creates "art" with the Cross of Jesus in a jar of urine, writes a filthy novel about Prophet Mohammad, drapes a toilet bowl with the Flag, or publishes 'research' showing that Blacks are mentally inferior to others. But, apparently, saying something negative, even stating a statistical and clearly known fact, about the number and control of Jews of Hollywood is unacceptable. It is worse than blasphemy.
Marlon Brando should have known that they would first Brand him (anti-Semitic) and then "make him an offer he could not refuse." It was amusing to see the JDL say they would "make his life a living hell" yet no one read anything into this threat. I can imagine the Jew York Times....errr... the NY Times staying as quiet had it been the Iranian government saying they would make someone's life a living hell.
Marlon just realized he would have to apologize to a "higher authority" than God, the Godfathers of Hollywood and the rabid rabbis of the media industry.
--------
So, as I said about Marlon.... Passion of the Gibson will meet the (double) cross(hairs) of Jollywood... and bow down.
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Oh God! I Can't Believe It, You Have Faith?
I am a Muslim. I posted a reply to a bunch of people who were on a mailing list that sent me a "news" item forwarded email that some Dutch Doctor had "proven" how saying Allah's name to patients cured them or some such story.
IMRAN TO MUSLIMS:
"Perhaps it is the WEAKNESS of our faith in our own FAITH of Islam that we read stories like this and somehow feel "better" about believing in Allah. The fact of the matter is that a most comprehensive study has shown that patients who were PRAYED FOR actually had WORSE results than the ones NOT prayed for. This can be looked up on the Internet.
Fact of that matter is, if I believe in Allah, it is and should be because I BELIEVE in Allah, not because someone emails us a story saying this or that urban legend makes Allah more believable. What do you think?
PLUS, if someone has contact info on this professor, I will be happy to interview him. Any info?
regards
Imran"
I shared the discussion points above on a religion (ALL religion) bashing newsgroup where someone wondered how I could believe in God by just believing... that is, when it can't be scientifically proven that there is a God.
IMRAN TO ATHEISTS:
"I am hardly a religious person to be discussing a defence of religion, but Yes, I believe in Allah/God/One "being"/power/force/entity (not a white bearded dude who had to rest after six days and needs humans to kill other humans) because I CHOOSE to BELIEVE. That is the whole point.
Not lobbing an insult, but do you know if your mother gave birth to you from your father or from any man she knew? Do you BELIEVE that or do you KNOW that because you had a DNA test done on your father and you? So, yes, today science allows you to test whether he is your father or not but for centuries of human existence atheists, while decrying others' religious BELIEFS, were probably living their whole life BELIEVING their father was their real father even when it was NOT true, nor could they prove it. The point is, everyone believes in some things, has something the put their faith in... their mother, their father, their girlfriend or wife not sleeping around.... they do it as BELIEF and FAITH, not because they have a private investigator giving them daily reports of fidelity.
So, regarding God, I believe.
I BELIEVE because it is my BELIEF and FAITH, though I cannot prove it, nor do I TRY to prove it but choose to believe it. If I had a notarized document from the FBI (can't trust CIA's slam dunk proofs!) PROVING there is a God, whose calls the NSA is moninting, it would NOT be FAITH or BELIEF, instead it would be KNOWLEDGE.
Sure, after I die my new-found post-mortem KNOWLEDGE may prove my BELIEF was misplaced and there is no God, nothing, an emptiness forever... so, fine, what did it cost me to believe? Nothing. How much of my brain CPU %age did it take? 0.00001% unless I become a priest whose every brain CPU second (when not raping little boys) is used up by religion.
If you're happy not believing in anything, that's fine by me. Anyone wanting to kill you for that can go to hell... but, you can''t really tell them that, because you don't believe in that. :-)
Imran"
IMRAN TO MUSLIMS:
"Perhaps it is the WEAKNESS of our faith in our own FAITH of Islam that we read stories like this and somehow feel "better" about believing in Allah. The fact of the matter is that a most comprehensive study has shown that patients who were PRAYED FOR actually had WORSE results than the ones NOT prayed for. This can be looked up on the Internet.
Fact of that matter is, if I believe in Allah, it is and should be because I BELIEVE in Allah, not because someone emails us a story saying this or that urban legend makes Allah more believable. What do you think?
PLUS, if someone has contact info on this professor, I will be happy to interview him. Any info?
regards
Imran"
I shared the discussion points above on a religion (ALL religion) bashing newsgroup where someone wondered how I could believe in God by just believing... that is, when it can't be scientifically proven that there is a God.
IMRAN TO ATHEISTS:
"I am hardly a religious person to be discussing a defence of religion, but Yes, I believe in Allah/God/One "being"/power/force/entity (not a white bearded dude who had to rest after six days and needs humans to kill other humans) because I CHOOSE to BELIEVE. That is the whole point.
Not lobbing an insult, but do you know if your mother gave birth to you from your father or from any man she knew? Do you BELIEVE that or do you KNOW that because you had a DNA test done on your father and you? So, yes, today science allows you to test whether he is your father or not but for centuries of human existence atheists, while decrying others' religious BELIEFS, were probably living their whole life BELIEVING their father was their real father even when it was NOT true, nor could they prove it. The point is, everyone believes in some things, has something the put their faith in... their mother, their father, their girlfriend or wife not sleeping around.... they do it as BELIEF and FAITH, not because they have a private investigator giving them daily reports of fidelity.
So, regarding God, I believe.
I BELIEVE because it is my BELIEF and FAITH, though I cannot prove it, nor do I TRY to prove it but choose to believe it. If I had a notarized document from the FBI (can't trust CIA's slam dunk proofs!) PROVING there is a God, whose calls the NSA is moninting, it would NOT be FAITH or BELIEF, instead it would be KNOWLEDGE.
Sure, after I die my new-found post-mortem KNOWLEDGE may prove my BELIEF was misplaced and there is no God, nothing, an emptiness forever... so, fine, what did it cost me to believe? Nothing. How much of my brain CPU %age did it take? 0.00001% unless I become a priest whose every brain CPU second (when not raping little boys) is used up by religion.
If you're happy not believing in anything, that's fine by me. Anyone wanting to kill you for that can go to hell... but, you can''t really tell them that, because you don't believe in that. :-)
Imran"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)