September 11, 2001

September 11, 2001, God bless the USA. Never forget.

Ancient Wall

'Massive' ancient wall uncovered in Jerusalem

JERUSALEM (CNN) -- An archaeological dig in Jerusalem has turned up a 3,700-year-old wall that is the largest and oldest of its kind found in the region, experts say.

The wall is built of enormous boulders, confounding archaeologists as to how ancient peoples built it.

Standing 8 meters (26 feet) high, the wall of huge cut stones is a marvel to archaeologists.

"To build straight walls up 8 meters ... I don't know how to do it today without mechanical equipment," said the excavation's director, Ronny Reich. "I don't think that any engineer today without electrical power [could] do it."

Archaeologist Eli Shukron of the Israel Antiquities Authority added, "You see all the big boulders -- all the boulders are 4 to 5 tons."

The discovered section is 24 meters (79 feet) long. "However, it is thought the fortification is much longer because it continues west beyond the part that was exposed," the Israel Antiquities Authority said in a news release.

It was found inside the City of David, an archaeological excavation site outside the Old City of East Jerusalem on a slope of the Silwan Valley.

The wall is believed to have been built by the Canaanites, an ancient pagan people who the Bible says inhabited Jerusalem and other parts of the Middle East before the advent of monotheism. Watch report on the discovery of the ancient wall »

"This is the most massive wall that has ever been uncovered in the City of David," Reich and Shukron said in a joint statement about the find. It marks the first time "that such massive construction that predates the Herodian period has been discovered in Jerusalem."

It appears to be part of a "protected, well-fortified passage that descends to the spring tower from some sort of fortress that stood at the top of the hill," according to the joint statement.

The spring "is located in the weakest and most vulnerable place in the area. The construction of a protected passage, even though it involves tremendous effort, is a solution for which there are several parallels in antiquity, albeit from periods that are later than the remains described here."

Such walls were used primarily to defend against marauding desert nomads looking to rob the city, said Reich, a professor at the University of Haifa.

"We are dealing with a gigantic fortification, from the standpoint of the structure's dimensions, the thickness of its walls and the size of the stones that were incorporated in its construction," the joint statement said.

Water from the spring is used by modern inhabitants of Jerusalem.

"The new discovery shows that the picture regarding Jerusalem's eastern defenses and the ancient water system in the Middle Bronze Age 2 is still far from clear," Reich said. "Despite the fact that so many have excavated on this hill, there is a very good chance that extremely large and well-preserved architectural elements are still hidden in it and waiting to be uncovered."

Star Wars Personality Test

Which Star Wars Jedi/Sith are you? Yoda Dynamite in a small package, and long-lasting, like the Energizer bunny. While you are wise and calm, you are able to call on your killer instincts and be kick-ass. Some may call you a ‘sleeper’. With such great power comes some arrogance, but you are quick to return to humility and fix your mistakes. You have certainly left your mark on the world, in good and bad ways, and it was kinda sad to see you go. But no need to worry, you have gained immortality even though you can’t wield your toothpick of a lightsabre anymore.

Click Here to Take This Quiz Brought to you by YouThink.com quizzes and personality tests.

Conservatives

A friend of mine wrote this on his blog. It relates back to what I wrote some time ago about fundamentalism and speaks to the fundamentalist beliefs of people from different backgrounds than you usually consider to be fundamentalists.

What follows is from Tim Bryce:

Following the release of one of my more politically inclined columns, I was accused by a reader of being an ultra conservative. The reader based his comments on established stereotypes of conservatives which I personally find distasteful. Such images have become rather old and tiresome, but were still effective in last year's elections. These stereotypes were concocted by the Media over time and inevitably raise their ugly heads during election time. What concerns me though is these images are simply fallacious and aimed at misleading people away from the true issues at hand. Let me give you some prime examples of conservative stereotypes:

CONSERVATIVES ARE PRO-BUSINESS, EVEN AT THE EXPENSE OF SQUASHING ANYTHING THAT GETS IN THEIR WAY, INCLUDING THE LITTLE GUY.
I think it is no secret that conservatives believe in the free enterprise system, the land of opportunity, and an honest day's wage for an honest day's work, but I do not believe they are as ruthless as they are portrayed. They are unapologetic capitalists who want less government control, not more. Conservatives tend to see government as the servant of the people, not the other way around. This drives anybody opposed to this way of thinking absolutely crazy, particularly socialists and communists. It's no small wonder that capitalists are portrayed as "fat-cats" who profit off the worker.

The reality is that you will find just as many liberals in the board room as you will find conservatives. Further, anyone who has faced the realities and risks of starting up his/her own company, particularly a small business, is somewhat inclined to appreciate capitalist principles.

CONSERVATIVES DO NOT SHARE AND WANT TO CREATE A MASTER/SLAVE CLASS SOCIETY.
This is just plain bunk. First, greed knows no political ideologue. Second, we're back to the capitalist argument whereby conservatives appreciate hard work and reward accordingly. Look, it's simple, you cannot do everything yourself; you have to delegate, empower, and support your people, which includes compensating them accordingly. It's just plain smart business. And third, conservatives give generously of themselves for a wide variety of causes. Although they balk at turning their wallets completely over to the government, conservatives gladly lend a helping hand to those who truly need it. Liberals certainly do not hold a monopoly on charitable causes.

CONSERVATIVES ARE ANTI-ENVIRONMENT.
It is generally believed that if you are a conservative, you have a fundamental disregard for the planet; that you want to rape the Earth and eradicate its resources. My question is, "Why?" This would imply that conservatives are like some visitors from outer space here to plunder the earth's resources and leave a dead shell. I'm afraid I haven't seen the conservative flying saucer yet, and I think we are all stuck on this planet together. In fact, conservatives have found such things as conservation, recycling, and land reclamation are not just good ideas, it's smart business.

CONSERVATIVES ARE ULTRA RELIGIOUS.
Show me a fanatical Bible thumper and I'll show you a conservative; Right? Wrong. I can't begin to tell you how many liberals I have met through organized religion. We often hear of the "Religious Right" which primarily consists of Christian groups, but I don't recall where it is written that a belief in Jesus Christ is a prerequisite for becoming a conservative. In fact, I've met conservatives from just about every religious faith imaginable. I will grant that conservatives tend to derive their core values from their religious beliefs, whatever they may be, but they are certainly not religious fanatics.

There is an interesting dichotomy here: whereas conservatives are accused of unethical behavior in business and the environment, they are also portrayed as religious zealots. I guess the assumption here is that organized religion doesn't promote ethical behavior.

CONSERVATIVES ARE UNEDUCATED, UNIMAGINATIVE, AND ONLY FOLLOW PARTY LINES.
There is a general belief that conservatives are incapable of intelligent discourse, are crude and lack creativity, and thereby must be told what to do. Gee, it kind of sounds like the goons in the Nazi Party under Adolph Hitler doesn't it?

The notion that conservatives are old-fashioned fuddy-duddies who resist change is erroneous. I know a lot of liberals who have been unbending in their ideas since the 1960's.

Since conservatives tend to have a business perspective they are somewhat inclined to be freethinkers, meaning if it makes sense to them, they'll buy it, regardless of who sells it. They will also make it plain if they do not agree with you, and perhaps this is what bothers their opposition. In fact, I find conservatives to be more open to debate; for example, consider the popularity of conservative talk radio programs (you don't see too many liberal programs do you?)

CONSERVATIVES DO NOT HAVE A SENSE OF HUMOR.
For a long time, conservatives have had to endure all kinds of jokes as communicated through political bumper stickers, cartoons, and late night comedians. In the process I think they have developed some rather thick skin and do, in fact, appreciate a good joke, although I admit their humor is not as destructive as others. But what is good for the goose should be good for the gander. Try poking fun at a liberal and you are accused of blasphemy. Now that's funny.

CONSERVATIVES ARE RACISTS.
I'm not even going to dignify this with a rebuttal.

CONCLUSION

The concept of conservative stereotypes is nothing more than brainwashing for the purpose of social engineering by the Media. Young people are taught early on that being a conservative is not "cool"...

"Did you know he is a conservative?"

"Really? He's one of them? Wow! That's lame."

Behind the facade of the conservative stereotypes is a deeply-rooted resentment to capitalism, which the conservatives embrace. Anti-capitalists want to replace the system and evenly spread the wealth regardless of how much effort a person exerts to earn it. To conservatives, capitalism is the stimulus that encourages people to become entrepreneurs; to move forward and take risks, to boldly go where no one has gone before, to evolve, and hopefully succeed.

Like I said earlier, I have been accused of being an "ultra" conservative. As an aside, a friend recently pointed out to me, how come we do not apply this adjective to liberals (an "ultra" liberal)? I guess it is another attempt to stereotype conservatives as extremists (and liberals are not?).

It has been my experience that conservatives take their fiduciary responsibilities seriously, they are not afraid to be held accountable for their actions, they want to lead a worthy and meaningful life, and possess an ethical makeup derived from their religious beliefs. If this is what an "ultra" conservative is, then I plead, "Guilty. Most guilty."

Sorry Janeane, the wiring is just fine.

"Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart.
Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains."
- Winston Churchill

If You want to read more if Mr. Bryce's material, go here:

http://www.phmainstreet.com/timbryce.htm

Whats Wrong With Working at Wal-Mart?

In an era where we are really short on low wage jobs, I am sick and tired of everyone bitching and moaning about people working at Wal-mart. The people that work there would rather be working than unemployed. This article by Charles Platt was brought to my attention. Charles Platt is a journalist, computer programmer and author of over 40 fiction and nonfiction books and was a senior writer at Wired magazine. The following is a portion of what Mr. Platt wrote:

LIFE AT WALMART
"How did I move from being a senior writer at Wired magazine to an entry-level position in a company that is reviled by almost all living journalists?

It started when I read Nickel and Dimed, in which Atlantic contributor Barbara Ehrenreich denounces the exploitation of minimum-wage workers in America. Somehow her book didn’t ring true to me, and I wondered to what extent a preconceived agenda might have biased her reporting. Hence my application for a job at the nearest Wal-Mart.

Getting in was not easy, as more than 100 applicants were competing for fewer than 10 job openings. Still, I made it through a very clever screening quiz, then through a series of three interviews, followed by two days of training. I felt ambivalent about taking advantage of the company’s resources in this way, but I was certainly willing to do my part by working hard at the store, at least for a limited period.

The job was as dull as I expected, but I was stunned to discover how benign the workplace turned out to be. My supervisor was friendly, decent, and treated me as an equal. Wal-Mart allowed a liberal dress code. The company explained precisely what it expected from its employees, and adhered to this policy in every detail. I was unfailingly reminded to take paid rest breaks, and was also encouraged to take fully paid time, whenever I felt like it, to study topics such as job safety and customer relations via a series of well-produced interactive courses on computers in a room at the back of the store. Each successfully completed course added an increment to my hourly wage, a policy which Barbara Ehrenreich somehow forgot to mention in her book.

My standard equipment included a handheld bar-code scanner which revealed the in-store stock and nearest warehouse stock of every item on the shelves, and its profit margin. At the branch where I worked, all the lowest-level employees were allowed this information and were encouraged to make individual decisions about inventory. One of the secrets to Wal-Mart’s success is that it delegates many judgment calls to the sales-floor level, where employees know first-hand what sells, what doesn’t, and (most important) what customers are asking for.

Several of my co-workers had relocated from other areas, where they had worked at other Wal-Marts. They wanted more of the same. Everyone agreed that Wal-Mart was preferable to the local Target, where the hourly pay was lower and workers were said to be treated with less respect (an opinion which I was unable to verify). Most of all, my coworkers wanted to avoid those “mom-and-pop” stores beloved by social commentators where, I was told, employees had to deal with quixotic management policies, while lacking the opportunities for promotion that exist in a large corporation.

Of course, I was not well paid, but Wal-Mart is hardly unique in paying a low hourly rate to entry-level retail staff. The answer to this problem seems elusive to Barbara Ehrenreich, yet is obvious to any teenager who enrolls in a vocational institute. In a labor market, employees are valued partly according to their abilities. To earn a higher hourly rate, you need to acquire some relevant skills.

As for all those Wal-Mart horror stories—when I went home and checked the web sites that attack the company, I found that many of them are subsidized with union money. walmartwatch.com, for instance, is partnered with the Service Employees International Union; wakeupwalmart.com is copyright by United Food and Commercial Workers International Union. Why are unions so obsessed with Wal-Mart? I'm guessing that if the more-than-a-million Wal-Mart employees could be unionized, they would be compelled to contribute at least half a billion dollars per year in union dues.

Subsequently I considered writing about my brief experience, but a book defending a company that has been demonized does not have a large potential audience, and the writer tends to be dismissed as either hopelessly naive or bribed by corporate America.

Similar factors result in someone such as Adam Shepard remaining relatively obscure.

If you haven’t heard of Adam Shepard, this illustrates my point. His remarkable book Scratch Beginnings, now being promoted through www.scratchbeginnings.com, describes how he went through an experience far more gruelling than my brief flirtation with low-paying work. He placed himself in a homeless shelter with $25 in his pocket, found a job as a day laborer, then worked for a moving company, and after 10 months had a pickup truck, an apartment, and $2,500 in savings. His conclusion: People can still make it in the United States if they are willing to live carefully on a budget and work hard.

Somehow that kind of news is never as popular as denunciations of the free market written by professional handwringers such as Barbara Ehrenreich."

Is Obama a Mason?

As seems to happen every time there's a US presidential election, our site
is regularly searched to find out if the candidates are Freemasons. OK. For
the record:

John McCain is NOT a Mason. His father, Admiral John Sidney McCain,
Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet during the Vietnam War and who died
in 1981, was.

*Barack Obama is NOT a Mason.*

Hillary Clinton is NOT a Mason. Her husband (former President Bill Clinton)
was a member of a Masonic-sponsored youth organization. . . .

Ron Paul is not a Mason although his father is.

George Bush is not a Mason. His father (former President George Bush) is not
a Mason. And the Skull and Bones fraternity at Yale University has NO
connection to Freemasonry whatsoever, despite what the person with the
tin-foil hat wants you to believe!

So whatever the motive for your curiosity, the answer is - NO! OK?

Fundamentalism

Fundamentalism is one of those things that is often associated with religion. There are Christian fundamentalists, Islamic fundamentalists, Mormon fundamentalists and so on. But what has it ever occurred to you that all of these movements have something in common? Once you see that they do, you also see that fundamentalism is present in many other aspects of life as well.

Religious fundamentalism is a reaction to any part of the religion that is complex. It is often law centered and always centers itself around and issue about what you personally should think or do. For instance, the religious text says that it is a bad idea to (whatever) or a good idea to (whatever) then that is how it is. There are no exceptions. Do this believe that. Circumstances, events, and all of the things which make life complex are completely ignored.

But if fundamentalism is a reaction to complexity, then it can be found in so many other aspects of life that it begins to amaze. An example that comes to mind is the attacks of September 11, 2001. For various reasons, Islamic fundamentalists hijacked several planes and flew them into the World Trade Center (a target that had been attacked for years) the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania.

Th reason for these hijackings is both simple and complex. They hate us. Why is where it becomes complex. But there are those in our society that cannot bear the thought that this is true. They simply cannot believe in a world complicated enough to bring about such action, so instead they invent an alternative story.

The alternative goes something like this. The world trade center was rigged with controlled demolition by President Bush in order to bring them down and declare war on the middle east in order to get more oil. The pentagon was hit by a missile. The planes were actually empty and were flown into the buildings remotely.

Fundamentalism is present in environmental thought as well. There are no doubt problems with the environment, but the answer is complicated and involves making better technology. However the fundamentalist view is that we must move backwards with our technology. No heat, no AC, no plumbing so poop in a bucket and dump in in your yard.

I realize that I have just scratched the surface of many topics here, but I am pointing out that they all have the same reaction to complex problems and that reaction is fundamentalist thought.

Just a few thoughts on fundamentalism. I would love to hear yours.