Rivers of blood in Dhaka

September 14, 2016

Eid in Dhaka.

From the Dhaka Tribune:

Pouring rain coupled with animal sacrifices all over the city have created a strange and disturbing scene.

As forecast by the meteorological office, Eid morning on Tuesday began with shower that continued intermittently into the evening. Despite the pouring, Dhaka’s citizens went to say their Eid prayers in the morning and sacrificed their animals. As rainwater built up on the roads of Dhaka and flooded many areas of the capital it got mixed with the blood to create an unusual and gory scene; it appeared as though there were red rivers running across the city.

Citizens have strongly criticised the two city corporations in charge of cleaning the sacrificial waste for this situation.

(Images from Dhaka Tribune)

dhaka-1

dhaka-2


 

“Therapeutic Use Exemptions” just a euphemism for legalised drug use by athletes

September 14, 2016

Of course, the Western media attack the messenger rather than the message when Russian hackers reveal that top US athletes (Venus and Serena Williams and teenage gymnast Simone Biles) have also been taking banned drugs. Of course the athletes involved claim that they never broke any rules and all their use of banned drugs were permitted and justified by genuine medical conditions. They all had “Therapeutic Use Exemptions” (TUE’s). Of course the Western media and sports authorities blame the Russians and imply that the revelations are all politically motivated.

Simon Biles took banned substances for ADHD. Is ADHD a “medical condition” or a genetic condition? Why only for ADHD? Why not permit drugs to compensate for any genetic condition? For any perceived “medical condition”, is it “fair” to other athletes that a natural or temporary disability be mitigated for some athletes by the use of drugs. Even if an athlete is genuinely sick, and therefore temporarily at a disadvantage, is it fair for that athlete to compete at all if drugs are used to overcome the disability? What if the drugs overcompensate for the disability? Why not then, permit drug use to compensate for all genetic disadvantages? All Usain Bolt’s rivals should then have been allowed performance enhancing drugs to give them a chance.

Radar: Serena Williams and Simone Biles tested positive for banned substances, but doping agents let them of the hook! That’s the suggestion of bombshell new medical records released by a Russian hacker group.

Hacking group Tsar Team, also known as Fancy Bear, infiltrated the the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) athlete database and released files that show tennis stars Serena and Venus Williams and teenage Olympian Biles all “received medical exemptions to use banned drugs,” according to The New York Times.

The hackers penetrated the database and managed to get hold of records that detailed “Therapeutic Use Exemptions” (TUEs). TUEs permit the using of banned substances due to athletes’ “verified medical needs,” the BBC reported.

Permitted doping is often exploited by national teams and their administrators. It has long been suspected that Norwegian skiers – who completely dominate the world of long distance skiing – have a very sophisticated system of using drugs – within the regulations – to give their athletes an advantage.

FasterSkier:As Norwegian skier Martin Johnsrud Sundby has decided to appeal his doping ban to the Swiss Supreme Court, stories have emerged suggesting that the Norwegian Ski Federation recommended that healthy skiers use salbutamol nebulizers – the same drug and method Sundby was issued a two-month ban for – as preventative therapy to maximize performance.

That suggests that a number of Norwegian athletes might have engaged in the same behavior which got Sundby in trouble in the first place. No other doping cases are known to exist from the Norwegian team. However, the International Ski Federation (FIS) rules mean that if an athlete had been caught with high levels of salbutamol like Sundby, it may have been kept quiet. After Sundby’s ban, men’s national team coach Tor Arne Hetland told FasterSkier that “we will not do the same mistake again.”

But what of the past? Norway’s TV2 talked with several cross-country skiers who say they were told by the national team to use nebulizers, even though they did not have asthma. A nebulizer delivers beta-2 agonists, drugs which help relax muscles in the airways. Such medications are banned for use by athletes up until a threshold dose.

TV2 would not reveal the identity of the athletes, but reported that one said they were “mildly surprised” to be offered the drugs even though they were not having difficulty breathing. In the same piece, national team director Vidar Løfshus said that this constituted “preventative care” to make sure that no athletes had airway obstructions.

It makes no sense to me that some privileged athletes are allowed legally to use drugs to compensate for some perceived “disabling conditions”. Either competition must be all drug-free or it must be without any restrictions for performance enhancing drugs. Of course the Olympics have, in reality, been PharmaGames for at least 4 decades. Baseball and American Football and weightlifting and wrestling and swimming are all sports where you have to be an expert in using the rules. In these and other sports, it has been common practice to to use drugs without breaking the regulations for quite a long time.

pharmagames

I am afraid the Western media do protest too much.


No presidential candidate has died or withdrawn after nomination (yet)

September 12, 2016

That Donald Trump is the nominated Republican candidate has already made this presidential election quite unusual. That the supposed conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton’s health problems are turning out to be true (forgetfulness, coughing fits, fainting …) is also unusual.

What else is or could be unusual?

Hillary is almost 69 and Trump is 70, though Clinton seems more likely to succumb to illness. Though it has never happened before, no presidential candidate has died or withdrawn after being nominated. Between Trump and Clinton it seems this election is going to be won by the one with the lowest negative perceptions on the day. Either of them being perceived as having a serious illness before election day could be so negative as to hand the election to the opponent.

Either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump becoming incapacitated before

  • election day, or
  • after the election but before the electoral college votes, or
  • after being elected but before inauguration, or
  • in office

is not unthinkable. The first 3 scenarios have never happened.  However there have been a few cases which have come close.

  1. William Henry Harrison (February 9, 1773 – April 4, 1841) was the ninth President of the United States (1841). He was 68 years, 23 days old when inaugurated, the oldest president to take office until Ronald Reagan in 1981. Harrison died on his 32nd day in office of complications from pneumonia, serving the shortest tenure in United States presidential history.
  2. In the election of 1872, Horace Greeley was the Democratic nominee for President, but the Democrats lost the general election to the Republican ticket, headed by Ulysses Grant. After the popular vote, but before the Electoral College vote, Greeley died. Because the Democrats had no chance of winning the election, given the outcome of the popular vote and the number of electoral votes already secured by Grant, the party did not bother to stipulate to their electors who an official replacement candidate would be, and most of the Democratic electors in the states that the Democrats had won cast their votes for people other than whom their party had nominated.
  3. In 1912, James Sherman, the Republican candidate for Vice-President (and the incumbent Vice-President under William Howard Taft) died on October 30 of kidney disease, a few days before the general election on November 5. The Republican National Committee scheduled a meeting to be held after the general election, on November 12, to select a successor, and Sherman’s name remained on the ticket for the general election. The Republicans lost, however (the Democratic ticket of Woodrow Wilson and Thomas Marshall won), and decided on November 8 not to meet as they had planned.

Both the Democratic and Republican parties have appropriate Bylaws in place to cater for most eventualities:

Both the Republican and the Democratic parties have rules in their bylaws governing how to fill the vacancy. The Party Chair calls a meeting of the National Committee, and the Committee members at the meeting vote to fill the vacancy on the ticket. A candidate must receive a majority of the votes to win the party’s nod.

The same process would happen if the vacancy were to occur after the general election but before the Electoral College voting. If a vacancy should occur on the winning ticket, it would then be the party’s responsibility to fill it and provide a candidate for whom their electors could vote. ….

A vacancy could occur at the top of a winning ticket during the period after the electoral votes had been cast but before the President-elect had been sworn in. … No President-elect has in fact failed to be sworn in. Nevertheless, the rules for what would happen if a President-elect were to be unavailable to be sworn in actually became a part of our law with the adoption of the 20th Amendment in 1933. This amendment was passed primarily to shorten the length of time between the general election and the beginning of the new administration (inauguration day was moved from March to January). But it also specified that if, at the time of the inauguration, the President-elect has died, then the Vice-President-elect becomes President, and if a President has not yet been qualified by that time, then the Vice-President-elect acts as President until a President has been so qualified.

With either Clinton or Trump as President, the possibility that their term has to be completed by their Vice Presidents is quite high.


 

By Clinton’s arithmetic slightly less than 33 million Americans are deplorable

September 11, 2016

She started the ruckus by saying that half of all Trump’s supporters were “a basket of deplorables”.

She later backed away from that but only to the extent of saying that the “half” was “wrong” but implied that many – without specifying how many – were still “deplorable”.

les-deplorables

image from theconservativetreehouse.com

The US population is now about 320 million and voter turnout in November will be about 42% of the total population. Of 135 million votes Trump will get – win or lose – about 67 million votes.

Even Hillary Clinton’s grasp of arithmetic should be capable of drawing the conclusion that she has just said that

  1. about 33 million Americans are deplorable, and with her non-apology
  2. something slightly less than 33 million Americans are “deplorable”.

Having used the word “half” she can no longer claim that she actually meant that anything much less than about 33 million Americans are “deplorable”. It could be 49% of 67 million or even 45% but it certainly could not be down to 40% (26 million). It will take some disingenuity for her to get past this.


 

US – Russia deal on Syria is a de facto acceptance of Assad’s position

September 10, 2016

The deal is that US backed rebels will not fight with forces  backed by Russia (Assad’s). That will allow the US, Russia and their proxies to fight ISIS forces wherever they may be in Syria and Iraq. However it is unlikely that Turkey will refrain from attacking Kurdish groups who are also in the front line against ISIS.

PHOTO: Secretary of State John Kerry, left, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov speak at a press conference, Sept. 9, 2016.

If the deal holds it effectively consolidates Assad’s improving position on the ground. But even if the deal does not hold, the US anti-Assad position is grossly undermined.

Reuters: 

The United States and Russia reached a breakthrough deal early on Saturday to try to restore peace in Syria, but air strikes hours later added to rebels’ doubts that any ceasefire could hold.

The agreement, by the powers that back opposing sides in the five-year-old war, promises a nationwide truce from sundown on Monday, improved access for humanitarian aid and joint military targeting of hardline Islamist groups.

But hours later, jets bombed a marketplace in rebel-held Idlib in northwestern Syria, killing at least 25 people and wounding dozens, according to locals and rescue workers who said they believed the planes to be Russian.

Idlib province has endured escalating strikes by Russian jets in recent months, according to international aid workers and residents, destroying scores of hospitals, bakeries and other infrastructure across rebel-held territory.

Aleppo was also hit from the air and fighting continued on the ground. The army attacked rebel-held areas, both sides said, pushing to maximize gains before the ceasefire deadline. …….

Kerry said the “bedrock” of the new deal was an agreement that the Syrian government would not fly combat missions in an agreed area on the pretext of hunting fighters from the Nusra Front, an al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria which has recently changed its name to Jabhat Fateh al-Sham.

Under the new deal, both sides – Russian-backed government forces and rebel groups supported by the U.S. and Gulf states, – are to halt fighting as a confidence building measure.

If the truce holds from Monday, Russia and the United States will begin seven days of preparatory work to set up a “joint implementation centre”, where they will share information to distinguish territory controlled by Nusra from that held by other rebel groups.

Moon of Alabama has this analysis:

It looks as if there has been unseemly resistance to this agreement by parts of the U.S. government. This may have been just for show. But it may also be a sign that Obama lost control of the bureaucracy:

The proposed level of U.S.-Russian interaction has upset several leading national security officials in Washington, including Defense Secretary Ash Carter and National Intelligence Director James Clapper, and Kerry only appeared at the news conference after several hours of internal U.S. discussions.After the Geneva announcement, Pentagon secretary Peter Cook offered a guarded endorsement of the arrangement and cautioned, “We will be watching closely the implementation of this understanding in the days ahead.”

If this deal falls apart, as it is likely to eventually do, all responsibility will be put onto Secretary of State Kerry. Indeed the military and intelligence parts of the U.S. government may well work to sabotage the deal while Kerry will be presented as convenient scapegoat whenever it fails.


 

Facebook forced to back down over Vietnam photo

September 9, 2016

My previous post was about the inane censorship applied by Facebook about Nick Ut’s iconic photograph of a naked girl fleeing after a Napalm strike.

It has taken almost a day for Facebook to see some sense – though it has only come after a massive wave of negative publicity to get them to do so. But their pronouncements suggest they still don’t understand that they are, in fact, a publisher whenever they censor or even prioritise certain content over others. They are a publisher first, a purveyor of advertisements second  and only a technology company as a distant third. Merely repeating their mantra of being a technology company does not change reality.

My previous post fed onto my Facebook page about 16 hours ago. However it does not seem that Facebook tampered with that feed in any way.

vietnam-photo-on-facebook

BBC: 

Facebook says it will allow an iconic photograph of a girl fleeing a Napalm attack taken during the Vietnam war in 1972 to be used on its platform. It had previously removed the image, posted by a Norwegian writer, on the grounds that it contained nudity.

The move sparked a debate about Facebook’s role as an editor. The editor of Norway’s largest newspaper had written an open letter to Facebook’s chief Mark Zuckerberg calling the move “an abuse of power”. The tech giant said it had “listened to the community” following a considerable amount of criticism about its decision to block the photo. …..


 

Facebook editors display their ignorance and “promote stupidity”

September 9, 2016

Probably the Facebook editors involved are just ignorant. Blaming the algorithm for their own shortcomings is rather pathetic.

This story in the Guardian about Facebook censoring this iconic Vietnam photograph:

vietnam-napalm-girl-photo-nick-ut-ap

photo Nick Ut /AP

The Guardian:

Norway’s largest newspaper has published a front-page open letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, lambasting the company’s decision to censor a historic photograph of the Vietnam war and calling on Zuckerberg to recognize and live up to his role as “the world’s most powerful editor”.

Espen Egil Hansen, the editor-in-chief and CEO of Aftenposten, accused Zuckerberg of thoughtlessly “abusing your power” over the social media site that has become a lynchpin of the distribution of news and information around the world, writing, “I am upset, disappointed – well, in fact even afraid – of what you are about to do to a mainstay of our democratic society.”

…… The controversy stems from Facebook’s decision to delete a post by Norwegian writer Tom Egeland that featured The Terror of War, a Pulitzer prize-winning photograph by Nick Ut that showed children – including the naked 9-year-old Kim Phúc – running away from a napalm attack during the Vietnam war. Egeland’s post discussed “seven photographs that changed the history of warfare” – a group to which the “napalm girl” image certainly belongs.

Egeland was subsequently suspended from Facebook. When Aftenposten reported on the suspension – using the same photograph in its article, which was then shared on the publication’s Facebook page – the newspaper received a message from Facebook asking it to “either remove or pixelize” the photograph. ……. 

Before Aftenposten could respond, Hansen writes, Facebook deleted the article and image from the newspaper’s Facebook page.

In his open letter, Hansen points out that Facebook’s decision to delete the photograph reveals a troubling inability to “distinguish between child pornography and famous war photographs”, as well as an unwillingness to “allow[ing] space for good judgement”.

“Even though I am editor-in-chief of Norway’s largest newspaper, I have to realize that you are restricting my room for exercising my editorial responsibility,” he wrote. “I think you are abusing your power, and I find it hard to believe that you have thought it through thoroughly.”

Hansen goes on to argue that rather than fulfill its mission statement to “make the world more open and connected”, such editorial decisions “will simply promote stupidity and fail to bring human beings closer to each other”.

Facebook is a publisher whether it wants to admit it or not. Just the act of censorship makes it a publisher. The world may well be dumbing down since the time of hunter-gatherers. And Facebook probably contributes to accelerating the glorification of stupidity.

aftenposten-facebook


 

Collateral advantages of Brexit for EU states

September 8, 2016

The Times reports (paywalled):

Former communist states are planning to exploit the fallout of Brexit with a “counter-revolution” designed to block migrant deals and assert the power of national governments over Brussels.

Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, an influential diplomatic European Union bloc known as the Visegrad Group, will lobby together at a summit next week to ensure that national governments are put back in the EU’s driving seat.

The summit will gather all EU leaders, excluding Theresa May, in Slovakia’s capital to forge a new vision of Europe. It is expected to expose the rift between newer member states ………

No doubt the UK will – in about 3 years – conclude a reasonable trade agreement with the EU and implement Brexit. No doubt also that EU citizens who have work to go to in the UK, will still be able to do so quite freely. But “benefit” tourism will become extremely difficult. The long term benefits for the UK will no doubt unfurl. I expect to see a revival of some old Commonwealth ties. New trade and labour movement agreements will be put in place. The UK could even gain a competitive edge over the remaining EU.

In the EU the dream for some of a Holy European Empire will receive a debilitating setback – thank goodness. But there will even be real benefit for all of the remaining members. For EU member states, the silver lining in the Brexit cloud will accrue only if the power of the EC and Brussels is sharply curtailed. If the EU Parliament (which – by any measure – is the most useless and wasteful institution in the world) happens to get abolished along the way, so much the better.

But one shouldn’t hope for too much.


 

The Patriarch

September 8, 2016

Circa 1915

 

ancestors1-1

Ancestors

The Patriarch (probably born between 1860-1870), with

  • his two sons seated to his right,
  • their wives standing behind them
  • his two daughters standing behind him and
  • his four grandchildren

ancestors1-11


 

The consumption of time

September 7, 2016

No change without the passage of time.

No passage of time without change.

That is almost trivial. It does not help to tell us what or why time is.

Or perhaps it does.

Perhaps time is a consumable. It is the fuel that is needed for and is consumed by change. Quantum of change per unit of time taken as miles traversed per gallon of fuel. It follows that we can stop the passage of time if we can stop change – down to the motion of the elementary particles. Time does not just pass – perhaps it has to be consumed.

Perhaps the single great mystery is gravitation. Then gravitation (or gravitational energy) is manifested as the passage of time. The speed of the passage of time then varies with the gravitational field. One real second per perceived second now, but perhaps zero at the Big Bang.

The magical speed of an inconstant time

speed of time

No time without gravity.

And no change without time being consumed.

So, no change without gravity and time is just the medium of change.