H5N1

Yep! We've got it!
First the boy threw up, with no regard for place or timing.
Then, on the same day, the wife puked...quietly, she can be so genteel sometimes.
The baby, the girl, then proceeds to have a fever for a full week. Appetite was off, diarrhea was evidenced, many, many times.
Last but not least was dad himself. Nausea...but I fought off the up-chucking. Diarrhea, uh-hunh. Finally, lack of energy and dearth of enthusiasm for life. There were times when I wished I was a simple chicken or duck...just cull me...cull me to death!


Now...comes my cold. Dammit! I almost got away with a cold-less and flu-less winter. Is there any good reason to have kids? Those vectors of dirt and germs!

Identical Twins!

Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, 67, fondly called the "Iron Lady" by her supporters, has become Africa's first elected female head of state following Liberia's presidential run-off





And Desmond Tutu...or is it?

What's Your Real Age?

This is a great web site suggested by a co-worker who is trying to quit smoking (as I am).
There are a series of lifestyle questions and then you get to find out whether you're a 103 or just 99 years old.
Other great stuff too. Click on the logo above to go their site.

Lisa and Finnegan

Lisa (of Montreal) and friend. Lisa works as a graphic web designer person for Kamik.

Lisa writes, "Here I am with the Kamik mascot for this year. I won the naming contest and his name is Finnegan."

Bushism

"Because the—all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those—changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be—or closer delivered to what has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the—like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate—the benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those—if that growth is affected, it will help on the red."

Source: Slate.com

Nuclear Proliferation

Recently, Iran has been pilloried over its nuclear ambitions. The crux of the problem is that the "world community" does not trust that Iran's nuclear program is strictly peaceful. Iran has said "its (nuclear) programme is solely aimed at energy production. It has threatened to resume uranium enrichment and end snap UN inspections of its nuclear facilities (which it currently allows) if it is reported to the (UN) Security Council"

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will consider a resolution drawn up by the five permanent Security Council members plus Germany to "report" Iran to the Security Council.

What follows is a part of the interview by "Newsweek with Mohamed ElBaradei," Director-General of the United Nations´ International Atomic Energy Agency. (Newsweek Magazine )

DICKEY: Do you have any indication that there is some other completely separate Iranian nuclear-weapons program?

ELBARADEI: No, we don´t. But I won't exclude that possibility.

DICKEY: But there's another problem. Even if the declared nuclear research is all that Iran has going, there's nothing in the Non-Proliferation Treaty itself to prevent them from enriching uranium - which they say is their right.(...)

ELBARADEI: Sure. And if they have the nuclear material and they have a parallel weaponization program along the way, they are really not very far - a few months - from a weapon. We need to revisit the treaty, because that margin of security is unacceptable. But specifically on Iran, the board is saying, "You have a right under the treaty to enrich uranium, but because of the lack of confidence in your program and because the IAEA has not yet given you a clean bill of health, you should not exercise that right. In a way, you have to go through a probation period, to build confidence again, before you can exercise your full rights."

While other nations such as Israel, India and Pakistan are somehow able and allowed to carry on with their nuclear programmes, Iran is somehow not capable of exercising this "right" until the
IAEAgives its approval.

Contrast Iran's dilemma with the history of Israel's now well known nuclear capabilities.

In 1986, Mordechai Vanunu, who had worked for nine years as a technician at the Dimona nuclear research centre in the Negev desert, revealed that Israel did indeed have a nuclear arsenal and a "weapons programme bigger and more advanced than anyone had previously thought." See related article at the BBCVanunu

Israel is thought to have started its quest for nuclear weapons soon after it came into existence in 1948. Since Vanunu brought the Israeli nuclear programme into the light of day, Israel has practiced a policy of deliberate ambiguity - namely, that Israel neither denies nor confirms that it does have nuclear weapons."

Vanunu was lured from London to Rome and kidnapped by the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, brought back to Israel and sentenced to life in prison. He languished in jail, a large part of which was spent in solitary confinement for 18 years.

Israel has never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, thus allowing it to escape scrutiny by the the IAEA. And its policy of deliberate ambiguity means that the United States (which has laws preventing it from supporting proliferating states) is able to accept Israel's policy at face value and can continue supporting Israel.

Perspective is everything. I have no doubt that if Israel did not possess overwhelming military force capable of defeating the many hostile states sorrounding it, every Israeli would be dead or swimming very quickly in the Mediterranean Sea. On the other hand, why is there always an assumption that only the states which currently possess nuclear weapons are somehow sane enough to have nuclear weapons? BBC article discussing inconsistency in U.S. approach to different nuclear powers.

Which brings me to Iraq -- of course! Were there any Weapons of Mass Destruction found after all? So, the United States invaded Iraq on a faulty assumption, turned and continues to turn a blind eye to the reality of Israeli nuclear capacities and then asks the world to follow it on the question of Iran's "right" to pursue nuclear capabilities?

I guess there really is no such thing as a level playing field.