I plucked this piece from popular science. It is very interesting and indicates how government, big oil and the auto industry have no intentions of looking for an alternative fuel source.

Burt Rutan, the visionary aircraft designer who created the first privately funded manned space vehicle, SpaceShipOne, told me a story recently about his EV1 electric car. He had happily driven the vehicle for years until General Motors decided not only to take it off the market but to take back all the leased vehicles that were on the road. “The day they came to get it, I was on the verge of hiding the thing in a cave,” he recalled. “I was going to show them an obliterated, burned-up airplane carcass and say, ‘There it is—go ahead and take it!’ ”

Instead, he sadly watched them haul away his EV1 on a flatbed truck. He was one of hundreds of owners of the sporty, fast, nonpolluting cars that GM reclaimed in 2003 and 2004 because, the company said, there was “no market” for them. “There are still times that I drive home, pull into the garage, and reach for the cable to plug in my car before I remember it’s long gone,” Rutan said.

Chris Paine’s documentary film Who Killed the Electric Car?argues convincingly that there was indeed a market for the cars—and a devoted one, at that—but that GM squashed the EV1 because, quite simply, it threatened the livelihood of the entire automotive industry. The car used no gasoline, no oil and no mufflers, and it required only sporadic brake maintenance. Each of these components represents billions of dollars in profits for the industry. GM, the oil companies and various government agencies argued that the car wasn’t practical, didn’t have enough range for consumers and was less promising than the apparently imminent hydrogen technology. The reality was exactly the opposite, Paine’s film suggests—the viability of hydrogen as an automotive fuel source alone is in fact almost comically optimistic.

The whisper-quiet EV1 was designed by another aviation pioneer, Paul MacCready of AeroVironment. In the 1970s, MacCready built the only successful human-powered aircraft, the Gossamer Condor and the Gossamer Albatross. His solar-powered electric car Sunraycer, built for GM, won the 1987 World Solar Challenge Race in Australia. His corporate mantra is “do more with less”—that is, focus on creating vehicles that require less energy to operate, not on finding ways to pump more power into inefficient systems. His team’s battery-powered EV1 was a triumph of engineering and a joy to operate.

Who Killed the Electric Car? begins with a mock funeral that was held in Los Angeles in July 2003, before the final EV1s were collected. Paine methodically presents his case with an onslaught of damning statistics about fossil-fuel consumption and a parade of EV1 enthusiasts, including actors Mel Gibson and Peter Horton, comic Phyllis Diller—who recalls the early electric vehicles from before the 1920s—and many notable automotive and energy experts. Two heroes emerge in Chelsea Sexton, an EV1 sales specialist whose emotional attachment to the car is palpable, and cowboy-hatted S. David Freeman, an influential former energy adviser to President Jimmy Carter who speaks in a slow Texas drawl of the broad conspiracies that sealed the EV1’s fate.

Those conspiracies are complicated and far-reaching but are essentially based in the California Air Resources Board’s inability to stand up to pressure from corporate and government entities that wanted it to rescind its 10 percent mandate for zero-emission vehicles. It was that mandate that had spurred GM to create the EV1 and introduce it in California. When the company realized the bottom-line implications of the car, it reduced its marketing program for it to a series of cryptic, uninspiring print ads and watched as public awareness unsurprisingly dwindled. GM, along with DaimlerChrysler and the U.S. Department of Justice, then sued CARB to rescind its mandate. The board eventually watered it down under new leadership—chairman Alan Lloyd, who has been heavily involved in the promotion of hydrogen-fuel-cell technology—to the point that electric vehicles were no longer a required part of manufacturer fleets, thus consigning the EV1 to the dustbins of automotive history.

The film ends with a poignant observation of the fate of the cars—all but a few museum pieces were crushed in the Arizona desert—and a “guilty/not guilty” sequence of the suspects in its mock murder trial. (There’s only one “not guilty,” and it’s something of a surprise.) But the urgent question in the aftermath is whether the electric car, given proper support, could be a viable alternative to fossil-fuel-burning automobiles. After watching Who Killed the Electric Car?, with its exciting depictions of the EV1 racing down the streets while leaving no pollution in its wake, the answer, frustratingly, seems to be yes.

Micheal 

The top five oil companies in the United States have recorded profits of $342.4 billion through the first quarter of 2006:

ExxonMobil: $118.2 billion
Shell: $82.3 billion
BP: $67.8 billion
ChevronTexaco: $43.1 billion
ConocoPhillips: $31.1 billion

Many industry analysts claim that rising demand in China and India are the big reasons why the price of oil is hovering around $70 a barrel.  However, they neglect to mention the role U.S. demand plays in setting global crude oil prices. Americans consume 25% of the world's oil every day. China, the next biggest consumer, uses less than 7% of the world's oil each day.  America's huge appetite for oil combined with the fact that the United States is the world's third largest producer of it (only Saudi Arabia and Russia produce more than we do) creates a strong argument that the United States holds a lot of sway over world oil prices.

The energy bill that President Bush signed this year does nothing to address the U.S. factors that are driving oil and gas prices to record highs. Congress and the White House explicitly rejected efforts to improve fuel economy standards for our cars and trucks (which account for 70% of our oil consumption) or adequately fund fossil fuel alternatives. Meanwhile, gas prices continue to go up and no oil company seems to be turning their profits into consumer savings, maintaining existing equipment and pipelines and researching ideas for alternative fuel sources. Earlier this year I was left rolling on the floor in laughter to hear Bush boy beseech his oil buddies to spend money looking for new fuel sources. BP, as one example, has done a fine job in the area and what timing too. With winter approaching now BP finds problems with the pipes from Alaska yet another reason to raise prices. 

Does the energy bill hold these price-gougers responsible? Simply put, no. Bush's signature on the bill this year gave $6 billion in tax breaks and subsidies to oil companies. So it would seem the $58 million in campaign contributions to federal politicians by the oil industry (81% of that total going to Republicans thanks Republicans you’re running America right into the ground.) since 2001 has not only won the oil industry immunity from scrutiny, but has won it taxpayer dollars.  This misguided energy policy keeps America on a path of continued dependence on fossil fuels and guarantees that consumers will continue paying record prices while the oil companies roll in profits.

Micheal

Some of the information above was gleaned from the public citizen whom does not accept funds from corporations, professional associations or government agencies.

And now from my “personally I don’t get it” files:

                                   The Democratic primary in Connecticut

To me, at least, it is wonderful to see an 18-year, rich, incumbent politician/King roused from office by a somewhat no body and in the words of Jackie Gleason, “How sweet it is!” and how even more sweeter it would be to me is if the whole lot of them where run out on a rail and for some straight into a prison cell.

However, I personally don’t get it. How is this a victory? All that has happened is the people of Connecticut has ousted a rich, Bush siding, war supporting, out of touch with the people, 18 year incumbent king only to replace him with a rich, never knew what it was like to be poor, house in the Hamptons blue blood whom has never held office higher than a selectmen? I really like the fact the Mr. Lamont has never been a career politician that is great however, I can’t get by the successful businessman from blue-blood an East coast family. Washington has far too many of these as it stand now and we have all seen how well they do for their constituents lately.

The Democratic party used too prides itself, or at least it thinks it does and used to, by always fighting for the little guys, the working man, against the rich, for the poor and the everyday American okay…so… what’s the big deal Demos? What’s the deal with the blue-blood? How does this guy know any better than Lieberman how real Americans have to live? Ah… but you see this race had nothing to do with the welfare of the people of Connecticut, America or anything that really matters.

No this is about face, this is about making the party supporters happy, this is the age-old game of Democrat vs. Republican. Lieberman got the axe not because of job performance, if you can call a career politician doing anything to have a job performance, and if he was so terrible how do he hold out for 18 years? No Joe was hacked because he got too close to the enemy, too close to the other side and that can’t be tolerated. It is a sin for political parties to work together for a better country. So dance and sing demo supporters enjoy your new blue blood yes he is new and wet behind the ears but don’t worry. Within a year the old party bosses will have him as corrupt as they are and he can spend 20 years in office doing nothing but getting richer. Yup, another keen victory in the making.

Micheal

As a Florida boy uhm, I should say a transplant my family moved from Ohio were I was born to Florida when I was 4, I know about heat. Many a time I remember the hazards of walking barefoot on the pavement on a hot Florida summers day. Even the sand on the beach would be very hot to walk on but relief was at hand the minute your feet hit the gulf water even though the water temps where 85 plus it was still soothing.

But it wasn't until I grew up and joined the service that I came to know about real heat. Some of the places in my journeys took me to regions where the heat was so oppressive that it made Florida seem like a paradise. It is from my experiencing such heat that my heart goes out to all those that are experiencing the tremendous heat that most of our nation is suffering through. The massive heat wave has killed many and is making life unbearable for many Americans. So please take it easy, find a cool place, drink plenty of water no beers, no sodas as they will only dehydrate you. Keep an eye on your elderly family members, neighbors and small children, as they are the one mostly affected from such high heat.

As for me, in my little neck of the woods in the mountains and forests of Northern New England we have been blessed with warm days and fairly cool nights. It was 77 here today with 35% humidity. We have had a few days where the temps have reached 91 but not many. Even when it does get warm during the day it cools nicely at night. However, in a few months while those of you in the southern U.S. enjoy nice mild winter days, we here will be waiting for spring.

Be safe and blessed be,

Micheal

It is the sad and undeniable truth that as long as politicians do not have to live like their average constitutants things like health care, social security and other issues important to Americans will not be their top priority.

Why should it be? Our ELECTED senators and congressmen and women do not pay into Social Security and, of course, they do not collect from it. Social Security benefits are for the “lesser” people and not for persons of their rare elevation in society. They felt they needed a special plan just for themselves and many years ago they voted in their own benefit plan. However, no ELECTED politician has felt the need to make any changes to this plan I mean hells bells it just a dandy plan! And this little plan of theirs works something like this:

When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die with exception it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments, which they themselves vote on. They dare not ask their employer the American people by a vote or other means they just take it upon themselves pretty cool huh?

Here are a couple of examples for you. Take ol’ former Senator Byrd, Congressman White and both their wives. At that time they expected to draw $7,800,000.00 with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives. This is calculated on an average life span for each of those two ELECTED servants. And it gets better a younger ELECTED servant of the people that retires at an early age, will receive much more during the rest of their life and the cost of this plan for them to get into?…..ZERO!!
The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General Funds; YOUR TAX DOLLAR!

As for the average American from our Social Security Plan, which we pay or have paid into every payday until we retire, we can expect to get an average of $1,000 per month after retirement. Chump change in comparison to what those will get who are suppose to be working for the good of the country when they retire. If we pulled that golden retirement plan these senators and congressmen have built for themselves out from under them and then put them on the same SS plan Americans are on you’d see just how fast the program would get fixed!

If moveon .org is so proud of itself for being so NONPARTISIAN why is it that every candidate you endorse are Democrats? Or does Moveon.org not know the correct definition of NONPARISIAN? Hmm lets see, oh, here it is NONPARTISAN “A group or organization without an affiliation or designation that would create a representation or special interest in a certain group or movement.” Interesting or how about this? “Nonpartisan also denotes organizations that do not have formal alignment with a political party.” Also interesting so what gives Moveon.org? Why are you playing with Democrats only? What is the matter with third party candidates hmmm? I don’t see you hyping any of them. Sure has hell they have just as much a chance if they had some push from organizations like you. OR do I suspect you are as guilty as the NONPARTISAN republican groups?. That American and her people really don’t matter at all. NO not at all, what is really important is that a Democrat is sitting in the Oval Office and Democrats control the Federal government. It is quotes like this that make me suspect,

“Operation Democracy is a network of committed MoveOn members who organize local actions in their communities to make a difference on national issues. Working together, members use grassroots strength and technology to organize high-profile local actions, like vigils and petition deliveries, to draw attention to the incompetence and corruption of the Republican leadership and in November, end the Republican control of Congress”.

And I just suppose that Democrats are pure, honest and above sin? Let me ask you in that last paragraph on Operation Democracy did any of that sound NONPARTISAN to you? Since when have Democrats knew anything about Democracy? I was a member of Moveon .org until I started really paying attention and I’ll tell you this isn’t what I though your movement would be. I thought we’d be working to oust all the corruption not add to it to and truly be NONPARTISAN but I’m not seeing it. As long as these criminals in office do not have to live as you and I do they will do nothing about health care, Social Security or other problems Americans are faced with. You see they don’t get SS and they don’t need to worry about where their health care comes from. So they aren’t in any hurry to fix anything. It’s all about raking in money and power and that the game both parties play.

So why not start endorsing third party candidates running in some of the races around the country why not try to be NONPARTISAN instead lying threw your teeth that you are? As long as a two party system is supported the needs of the American people will not be met. You are just feeding the endless cycle. Hey you! Mr. Republican your so-called NONPARTISAN groups are next along with all your religious right zealots and mullahs!

Blessed be,

Micheal

I don't know about you but I wonder sometimes if Mr. Bush ever really thinks about what he is about to say or has said. Take the G8 summit for instance. During a press conference with Russian President Putin our President, the so called leader of the free world just had to open his pie hole with this well thought out and planned statement. Mr. Bush told the Russian leader that people in the United States wanted Russia to promote the sort of democratic institutions that exist in Iraq (insert rolls eyes icon here).

Okay stop right there! Hold the "way back machine" there Sherman what democratic institutions?? As far as I know things are still not running on all eight cylinders and there is still some major spark plug fouling going on in some of the cylinders. And my I also interject that I am one of those "people in the United States" and I have never wanted Russia to do anything it's not my country and un-like Mr. Bush, I am more concerned about what happens here in MY country. I guess Mr. Bush is still trying to convince, not only himself that Iraq is one hell of a nice place and that U.S. policy is working Jim-dandy, but world leaders as well. Does Mr. Bush really want this for the people of Russia?

Ah but that sliver tongued devil Putin had this response to Mr. Bush's little jab and it went a little something like this, “To be honest, we certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq,” WOW that pitch had some pepper on it and it went right down the middle of the strike zone and Mr. Bush couldn't hit that one out of Burger Ville!

So was this some sort of strategic jab at Mr. Putin for some percieved lack in democratic

reform in Russia by Mr. Bush? OR was this yet another mindless and thoughtless outburst by our leader once again making us Americans look like world-class chumps? You make the call but from my vantage point I think it was yet another mindless and thoughtless outburst making us Americans look like world-class chumps. Democratic institutions that exist in Iraq?? You were just being jovial weren’t you Mr. President?

Blessed Be,

Micheal

American is broken folks and there is no way around it and it can no longer be ignored. It

is extremely easy to get on a blog and write what is wrong with America without at least giving some examples on how it can be fixed. The good news is that our country’s troubles can be fixed however the cure may involve actions that many would prefer to avoid. This means that those who to undertake the challenge to change America will have to suffer discomfort and some sacrifice. The fix is not new and it is not complicated. It is a very simple cure and that is to replace those in power. Yes, I understand that many of you have considered and accepted this concept. But just accepting it is not enough and the individual components of this concept should be examined. Then you, and only you, need to decide whether this is a worthy concept and if you are willing to see it though. But be ye warned to go against the grain is never easy and be prepared to be attacked verbally and sociably. You need to gauge the degree of your commitment and how you will react to attacks only then can you decide to continue your quest.

How do you vote and what effect does it have?

Fist off folks, it is no secret that the system is broken and neither the Republican nor Democratic parties can fix what is broken in America. In actuality both parties have made our problems worse. Their policies and their leadership abilities have failed. They do nothing but offer the same old lines and the same old fixes. They do not care about America what truly matters to them is if their party is in control and the building of personal wealth. Now then, if you are of the thinking that changing from one major party to the next and voting for the “lesser” of the two evils will solve the problem you are only fooling yourself and in most cases only contributing to the problem. In reality it does little good to vote for the challenger to an incumbent in office especially if that challenger is either a Democrat or Republican. No matter how many promises are made, no matter how honest or committed the challenger is once they become a member of Congress or the Senate and hit the beltway in Washington, they are strongly urged to adopt the party line if they want any chance of having any kind of future in Washington politics.

Then there are those of us that vote for someone because of some personal idiosyncrasy we may have about the candidate. A couple of examples of this are: (1) the type of individual who vote for a candidate because "Congressmen Smith grew up in this town and I went to school with his brother and I’ve known his family since I was a kid. At the opening of the new town hall Congressmen Smith patted me on the back and asked how my Mom was. He’s a great guy and he’ll get the job done!” However, Congressmen Smith might have been a great guy when he lived in town and even delivered a few pork barrel projects to the people back home, BUT his first loyalty is to his party be it Republican or Democrat. As a matter of fact the good Congressmen Smith votes for many programs you disapprove of. He is the one of the problems facing this nation and if you are really committed to fixing the problem Congressmen Smith needs to go no matter what your personal feelings are about him. Remember REPLACE THOSE IN POWER!

(2) Some other personal idiosyncrasies when it comes to making choices on whom to vote for sounds like this, “Daddy was a die-hard Democrat and so was Grand-daddy and that’s how I vote. I’ll do anything to keep a Republican out of that office!” OR “ Mother supported the Republican party all her life so I vote Republican…it’s for Mother.” AND “ I really don’t know what this guy’s issues were about but I voted for him because the other party said he was evil.” People, people how does this help anything but to continue the cycle of bad leaders?

Those who will try silence you

However, there are MANY groups that are very content with the way things are. But even though the majority of the country outnumber these groups, they seem to have more of an impact on public opinion than most of us do. These small, but vocal, groups of our society includes the mainstream media, those in the entertainment field, academia, special interest groups and activist organizations. All attempt by concerned Americans to change and fix things in American society will incur garner the wrath of this small segment of the population. Yet, they will not attempt to engage us in logical arguments. Instead they will continue to impede the motives of the concerned American with their derogatory labels and catcalls that have been their weapon of choice in the past.

Okay so you are willing to express your opinions publicly by writing to the editor of your local newspaper for a start. Let it be known and understand that your local newspaper may not put them in print. They are part of that mainstream media I referred to in the paragraph above and like most papers have their own political agenda. Then again your letter may just make it into the paper of course after it has been edited to death and beyond anything you had written. But wait don’t stop because the more you hound these people the likelihood of you letters being printed go up. Then others who feel as you do can see they are not alone!

A possible fix Americans need to support a third party.

For most Americans this will be a difficult choice. If Americans reject the Republican and Democratic parties whom should they support? In reality there are many but here the names of three parties for the best chances at breaking the two party monarchy, the Southern Party, the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party. Americans really need to take a look at these third parties and give them the support they need in order to effect change. These three parties can be very formidable adversaries to the old two parties that control government at present. But they need your help. Now you are asking, “What are the chances of a third party going against the two major parties?” well let’s look at history. 1968, George Wallace captured 14% of the popular vote even after being vilified by the media. 1992, after withdrawing and reentering the race, firing his campaign manager, selecting a weak running mate and other flip-flopping, Ross Perot still garnered almost 20% of the popular vote. 1912 Teddy Roosevelt got almost 30% of the popular vote in the 1912 election. Fantastic statistics for a third party bid for President! Now think how a third party candidate would do with the majority of Americans backing them? I’m telling you it is possible if folks would just stop buying the crap Washington and the media is feeding us!!

Now the mainstream media will try it’s best to try to make you believe a third party victory is even possible. And then there are those that will tell you that you are wasting your vote by going with a third party. But I’m telling you now that the Demos and Repubs will do nothing but continue to cause more problems for this nation with their failed leadership. The only other choice is to not vote at all and this will lead to our right to vote being extinguished and lead the United States to a dictatorship. A victorious third party would be the best thing to happen to America. Yes, it’s a grand undertaking and will take a lot of work by many people. But it must be done because the state of America cannot be ignored any longer.

Blessed Be,

Micheál

Please tell me? What in the hell is wrong with you? Why do you continue to ignore the poor leadership by those you have elected to office? Are you afraid of them? Are you cowards? Or is it that as long as you have your cable TV, six pack, NASCAR, baseball, American Idol, crap for music, gas guzzling cars, cell phones and your self absorbed, “ME in my own little world/if it doesn’t effect me who cares” attitude you think all is well? DO you like to be ignorant? Do you like to see your country sold piece by piece? What has happened to the American will? What did you all roll over and die? Sure seems as if you have by the way you've surrendered to a corrupt governemnt!

Do you like the fact that your so-called elected officials that you have placed in public office to serve your needs and to represent your wishes, to be your voice in government have appointed themselves mini kings? Surely it must rip you a new asshole to know that these government servants of the people live better than you. They have no need to worry about rent, heat, to decide on food or medication, crime, war (they just send you why should they risk anything?), fuel prices and all the other menial things real Americans are faced with and all this is done at your expense and tax dollar. MEANWHILE, as they continue to draw a salary for poor job performance, they continue to receive generous bonuses from their corporate handlers, lobby groups, book deals and speaking engagements. Even the window-dressing of two parties does not conceal the fact that both parties are controlled by the same money powers. If we look at the record of the Democratic and Republican parties over the last twenty years there is very little difference.

But that’s okay with you isn’t it Mr. And Mrs. America? You can’t be bothered with that! Oh no, you have your little holiday weekend coming up! Gas up the SUV, as you bitch and moan about gas prices, head for the mountains (My God will I get cell phone reception up there?); add to those green house gases. But don’t you dare speak up against those that are making themselves wealthy and have no intention to do anything about the real needs of America. No you go right ahead and let the mini kings make their useless laws and mindless policies to make their corporate handlers and themselves wealthy! Let them pass billion dollar aid packages to make a foreign government friendly so that their corporate masters can get a foothold in that country’s market and resources. However, the American government tells poor and middle class Americans who have lost everything by natural disasters, illness or job loss that there is no money to help them or they do not qualify for assistance. Yet people in foreign lands benefit from the tax dollars taken from an American’s hard earned pay but he, the American public in need, is not entitled to the benefits. Enjoy your weekend pal.

You, Mr. And Mrs. America make me angry. What is the purpose to serve your country when the people let it go to hell? What is the purpose of bother soldiers, sailors and Marines dying in the service of the people if the people only care about themselves and just don’t give a damn what government does for them. In this case NOTHING! If Americans only knew the number of vets that are angry with them for letting government get out of hand like this. But I know many Americans could give a red-rat’s-ass! Government would not get away with half of the bullshit they do if you didn’t sit on your collective asses and let them. There are more important things than your petty TV programs!

Do you not think they know this? Do you not think they know you are ignorant, lazy and self absorbed? Do you not realize that if they continue to raise taxes, raise the cost of living, turn your heads away from real issues facing America with factious threats to freedom and lies they have you in chains? What, you think because you vote in some dumbass fixed election you have freedom? That you govern??? Please there is more to it than that but what is the use of laying it out to you if in the end you’ll do as you’ve always done….NOTHING!! My mum had this old Gaelic saying which translates into this, “What comes around goes around.” Yes, indeed you maybe sitting there with a good job, house, car, cell phone, and all the amenities thinking “It can’t happen to me so who gives a damn I got what I want!” But if Americans let government continue on the path that it’s going now all the things you have now will be too expensive to keep.

I can't say all that I'd like to in today’s blog I don't have the room. But I leave you with this quote that the plutocrats and government has lived by for many years:

"Let the people think they govern and they will be governed."

William Penn (1644"1718), founder of Pennsylvania

I read an article from the Washington Post about a fallen soldier from the small town of Fernley, Nev. His name was Sgt. Patrick D. Stewart and was killed while on duty in Afghanistan. In this town of Fernley there is a wall of brass plaques for local heroes. However Sgt. Stewart’s spot is vacant and why is it vacant? It is because Sgt. Stewart was of the Wiccan faith and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has refused to allow a symbol of the Wicca religion, a five-pointed star within a circle, called a pentacle to be inscribed on U.S. military memorials or grave markers.

However, The department has approved the symbols of 38 other faiths. About half of are versions of the Christian cross. It also allows the Jewish Star of David, the Muslim crescent, the Buddhist wheel, the Mormon angel, the nine-pointed star of Bahai and something that looks like an atomic symbol for atheists. So tell me what is the big deal that the pentacle cannot be added to the list of religious symbols? Federal courts have recognized Wicca as a religion since 1986 so what’s up with the VA??? Or is this more work of the so-called “Religious Right” and its ignorance of other faiths??

To whom it may concern Wiccans were not the only ones to use the up-right pentacle. Many other faiths down thorough history have used the pentacle as a religious symbol. It is believed the pentacle came from the Goddess Kore (a.k.a. Car, Cara, Carnac, Ceres, Core, Kar, Karnak, Kaur, Kauri, Ker, Kerma, Kher, Kore, Q're, etc.). In ancient Greece, Pythagoras (586 - 506) established a school which pursued knowledge in mathematics, music, religion, and other specialties. Driven underground, his followers used the pentagram as a secret sign to identify themselves to each other. It was used by the Coptic Gnostic Christian Gnostic religion in Alexandria, Egypt, during the 4th century. Her festival, the Koreion, was held yearly on JAN-6. This was adopted by the Christian church as Feast of Epiphany (a.k.a. Twelfth Night). This date is still celebrated as Jesus' birthday in Armenian churches, and is observed with more pomp than is Christmas by the Greek Orthodox Church. In England, the Koreion became the Kirn the Feast of Ingathering. The Christian church later adopted it to the Feast of Our Lady of Mercy.

During the times of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament), the pentacle was the first and most important of the Seven Seals an amulet whose seals represented the seven secret names of God. It was inscribed on King Solomon's ring, which is often called Solomon's seal in error. Each point of the pentacle was also interpreted as referring to the five books of the Pentateuch or the first five books in the Hebrew Scriptures the Torah.

The five points of the pentacle have been interpreted as representing the five wounds of Christ (2 wrist, 2 ankle and 1 side). The Roman Emperor Constantineused the pentacle in his seal and amulet. It has been widely used by past Christians as a protective amulet. It wasn’t until the burning times when the Christian church burned alive or hung hundreds of thousands of innocent people, the meaning of the pentacle changed. It began to symbolize a goat's head or the devil in the form of Baphomet. "The folk-symbol of security for the first time in history the pentacle was equated with evil and was called the Witch's Foot."

The inverted pentacle with a goat's head is called the Sigl of Baphomet. The term may have come from two Greek words, baphe and metis, meaning "absorption of knowledge." It has also been called the Black Goat, Devil's Goat, Goat Head, Goat of Mendes, and Judas Goat. Its first appearance appears to have been during the vicious interrogation of members of the Knights Templar by the Christian Inquisition. There was little consensus among different victims' descriptions of the Baphomet. It can probably be safely assumed that their description of the Baphomet is more a product of the Inquisition's torture methods than of any actual statue that was in use by the Knights.

During the 20th century, Satanists inverted the upright pentacle and adopted it as their own symbol. However, the symbol is most commonly shown with the head of a goat within the pentacle.In the 20^th century Karl Kellner and other German occultists formed the secret order of the O.T.O. (Ordo Templi Orientis or Order of Templars in the East). They installed the English occultist Aleister Crowley to head their British section. Crowley took Baphomet as his magical name.Today, the Baphomet is widely used by religious Satanists. The Church of Satan also uses a second symbol which is an infinity sign (a figure 8 on its side). A Roman cross is placed on top with a second, longer cross piece added beneath the top cross piece.

Sgt. Stewart was a Wiccan not a Satanist or a user of black magic. He paid the ultimate sacrifice in service of this country and its people. So why should he not have his wishes recognized? Why is it fair for the other faiths to be recognized but not his? He risked as much as they did. It really angers me to see a fellow brother-in-arms used to the end by a thankless government. These people we elect to lead our country are willing to risk the life of another just to perpetrate the expansion of their love for wealth and power only to return nothing to the fallen heroes and the families that have lost loved ones. Where is their shame?

Blessed Be,

Micheal

Has the warrior become obsolete? Should the United States change the way it prosecutes engagements in the future? Since the ending of World War two the major powers and their armies have engaged in guerrilla wars in distant lands only to be defeated by an enemy who did not possess the technology, firepower or resources the so called super powers have come to rely so heavily upon. History gives us examples with France in Vietnam, the U.S. in Vietnam, Russia in Afghanistan and now the U.S. in Iraq and I add Afghanistan because things are not going so cheery there either. It just seems the media and the Bush administration has forgotten about that mission.

So why do such super armies fail in these conflicts? It may have to do with the fact that these governments train their armies, navies and air forces with the mind set of a warrior and in now obsolete rules of engagement. “The Warrior is emotionally suited to pitched, Pattonesque battles of moral clarity and simple intent. I don’t mean that he is stupid. Among fighter pilots and in the Special Forces for example it is not uncommon to find men with IQs of 145. Yet emotionally the Warrior has the uncomplicated instincts of a pit bull. Intensely loyal to friends and intensely hostile to the enemy, he doesn’t want any confusion, as to which is which. His tolerance for ambiguity is very low. He wants to close with the enemy and destroy him.” " Fred Reed

This ideal works well when an army engaged an army such as the battles of WWII and before. However, in today’s conflicts it is an obsolete idea because we are dealing with a much more intelligent enemy. This enemy knows that they have no chance to slug it out with America’s military and industrial might and live to tell the tale. This enemy probes for America’s weak points. One of these weaknesses is America’s willingness to engage in distant conflicts in which the American people have no interests and American soil is not threatened. In this type of conflict the enemy needs the make the American people weary of war not with pitched battles on open ground, at sea or in the air. But by keeping the level of violence high enough, threw smaller more deadlier actions, that it remains fresh in the everyday American’s conscious. This enemy wants to make prosecuting the war expensive to the American people from high prices for fuel and goods to the never-ending parade of body bags. This enemy knows if they keep this type of warfare going long enough that the American people will grow sick of it and feel it is not worth the lives of their sons, fathers, brothers and husbands. The cost is far too great and all out victory will be at hand. This worked well for Ho Chi Minh and now seems to be working well with the insurgency in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

However the mentality of the warrior does not grasp this type of warfare or victory. Victory for him is measured in battles won, in firepower, ground taken and held and resources captured. He believes in unleashing the full might of his military hard targets on the battlefield while ignoring the small but deadlier threats. He enters combat full of emotion and with little rational thinking fueled by the propaganda and wild tales from his government that takes advantage of his blind patriotism and sense of duty. That this is a just cause, for freedom and democracy, for God and country! Unfortunately, he is out thought and defeated by an enemy that does not use conventional arms but political ones one of them being the tolerance of the American people.

The Bush administration suffers from this acute “warrior” syndrome. This administration is not granting the American people the right to grow weary. It cares not about the flow of coffins to small town America. This warrior’s reasons for staying in these failing missions are unacceptable to many an American and grow even more unacceptable each day. There is no rationality or purpose but to control and seize power and potential wealth. This warrior does not want you to ask why but to stay the course, fight the good fight and to bare it a little longer. Well Mr. President, Congress and the Senate the American people have bore enough! Now is the time to end all failed missions and return to the more pressing matters at home and not become the victim if yet another lost and senseless war at the hands of a smaller enemy.

Blessed be,

Micheal

The mission has failed and President Bush’s call to “stay
the course” is a lesson in futility. In this piece I have included a short
article written by Lt. Gen. William E. Odom (US Army, ret.) titled “Cut and Run? You Bet.” It truly brings to light why our troops
should be extracted from their mission in Iraq.

"Cut and� Run? You Bet!"

Withdraw immediately or stay the present course? That is the key
question about the war in Iraq today. American public opinion is now
decidedly against the war. From liberal New England, where citizens
pass town-hall resolutions calling for withdrawal, to the conservative
South and West, where more than half of “red state” citizens oppose the
war, Americans want out. That sentiment is understandable.

The
prewar dream of a liberal Iraqi democracy friendly to the United States
is no longer credible. No Iraqi leader with enough power and legitimacy
to control the country will be pro-American. Still, U.S. President
George W. Bush says the United States must stay the course. Why? Let’s
consider his administration’s most popular arguments for not leaving
Iraq.

If we leave, there will be a civil war.
In reality, a civil war in Iraq began just weeks after U.S. forces
toppled Saddam. Any close observer could see that then; today, only the
blind deny it. Even President Bush, who is normally impervious to
uncomfortable facts, recently admitted that Iraq has peered into the
abyss of civil war. He ought to look a little closer. Iraqis are
fighting Iraqis. Insurgents have killed far more Iraqis than Americans.
That’s civil war.

Withdrawal will encourage the terrorists.
True, but that is the price we are doomed to pay. Our continued
occupation of Iraq also encourages the killers"precisely because our
invasion made Iraq safe for them. Our occupation also left the
surviving Baathists with one choice: Surrender, or ally with al Qaeda.
They chose the latter. Staying the course will not change this fact.
Pulling out will most likely result in Sunni groups’ turning against al
Qaeda and its sympathizers, driving them out of Iraq entirely.

Before U.S. forces stand down, Iraqi security forces must stand up.
The problem in Iraq is not military competency; it is political
consolidation. Iraq has a large officer corps with plenty of combat
experience from the Iran-Iraq war. Moktada al-Sadr’s Shiite militia
fights well today without U.S. advisors, as do Kurdish pesh merga
units. The problem is loyalty. To whom can officers and troops afford
to give their loyalty? The political camps in Iraq are still shifting.
So every Iraqi soldier and officer today risks choosing the wrong side.
As a result, most choose to retain as much latitude as possible to
switch allegiances. All the U.S. military trainers in the world cannot
remove that reality. But political consolidation will. It should by now
be clear that political power can only be established via Iraqi guns
and civil war, not through elections or U.S. colonialism by
ventriloquism.

Setting a withdrawal deadline will damage the morale of U.S. troops.
Hiding behind the argument of troop morale shows no willingness to
accept the responsibilities of command. The truth is, most wars would
stop early if soldiers had the choice of whether or not to continue.
This is certainly true in Iraq, where a withdrawal is likely to raise
morale among U.S. forces. A recent Zogby poll suggests that most U.S.
troops would welcome an early withdrawal deadline. But the strategic
question of how to extract the United States from the Iraq disaster is
not a matter to be decided by soldiers. Carl von Clausewitz spoke of
two kinds of courage: first, bravery in the face of mortal danger;
second, the willingness to accept personal responsibility for command
decisions. The former is expected of the troops. The latter must be
demanded of high-level commanders, including the president.

Withdrawal would undermine U.S. credibility in the world.
Were the United States a middling power, this case might hold some
water. But for the world’s only superpower, it’s patently phony. A
rapid reversal of our present course in Iraq would improve U.S.
credibility around the world. The same argument was made against
withdrawal from Vietnam. It was proved wrong then and it would be
proved wrong today. Since Sept. 11, 2001, the world’s opinion of the
United States has plummeted, with the largest short-term drop in
American history. The United States now garners as much international
esteem as Russia. Withdrawing and admitting our mistake would reverse
this trend. Very few countries have that kind of corrective capacity. I
served as a military attaché in the U.S. Embassy in Moscow during
Richard Nixon’s Watergate crisis. When Nixon resigned, several Soviet
officials who had previously expressed disdain for the United States
told me they were astonished. One diplomat said, “Only your country is
powerful enough to do this. It would destroy my country.”

Two
facts, however painful, must be recognized, or we will remain
perilously confused in Iraq. First, invading Iraq was not in the
interests of the United States. It was in the interests of Iran and al
Qaeda. For Iran, it avenged a grudge against Saddam for his invasion of
the country in 1980. For al Qaeda, it made it easier to kill Americans.
Second, the war has paralyzed the United States in the world
diplomatically and strategically. Although relations with Europe show
signs of marginal improvement, the trans-Atlantic alliance still may
not survive the war. Only with a rapid withdrawal from Iraq will
Washington regain diplomatic and military mobility. Tied down like
Gulliver in the sands of Mesopotamia, we simply cannot attract the
diplomatic and military cooperation necessary to win the real battle
against terror. Getting out of Iraq is the precondition for any
improvement.

In fact, getting out now may be our only chance
to set things right in Iraq. For starters, if we withdraw, European
politicians would be more likely to cooperate with us in a strategy for
stabilizing the greater Middle East. Following a withdrawal, all the
countries bordering Iraq would likely respond favorably to an offer to
help stabilize the situation. The most important of these would be
Iran. It dislikes al Qaeda as much as we do. It wants regional
stability as much as we do. It wants to produce more oil and gas and
sell it. If its leaders really want nuclear weapons, we cannot stop
them. But we can engage them.

None of these prospects is possible unless we stop moving deeper into the “big sandy” of Iraq. America must withdraw now.

Lt. Gen. William E. Odom (Ret.) is senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and professor at Yale University. He was director of the National Security Agency from 1985 to 1988.

Also, please if you can help this former Irish Roman Catholic out with this question.

worldly affairs? Did not Christ warn his disciples that if one serves two
masters he would grow to love one and hate the other? This has always confused
me and was one of the main reasons I walked away from the Church. I guess I was
just naive to believe that God didn’t play politics.

to this question. Truly I am.

Blessed be,