Infantry! Born to Walk and Built to Last

Clausewitz...

2009-10-06T11:58:00.002+08:00

If War is politics by other means, and politics is an extension of the national will, then what can we say about the American way of waging war?

The past century has seen the United States involved in conflicts great and small, all around the globe. Yet, there is no consistent thread of reason behind this involvement. Sometimes, the exercise of force is purely on the basis of national interests, at other times, moral or ethical issues motivate the deployment of soldiers to fight. Yet American soldiers have been withdrawn, some say due to political cowardice, in situations like the Beirut bombing, or in Somalia. America has also refused to deploy troops even when there is a overwhelming moral imperative, as in Darfur.

The American military, then, can be seen as a raging wildfire, with no lasting purpose, no long term direction. It takes the direction of the blowing winds of popular opinion, ever-changing. Although wildfires devastate the land, some seeds need a fire before they can germinate. Similarly, military intervention is not uniformly bad.

Therefore, for better or for worse, the world is currently held hostage to the domestic concerns of the American public. Is the oldest surviving democracy the best leader of an increasingly multi-polar world?

Success In Iraq: A Media Blackout

2008-05-21T17:07:00.001+08:00

More support for the argument that relying on a free, supposedly unbiased media isn't the way to go to get your news. Also for the need for the military to be able to influence the media through info-ops and such.

By Ralph Peters

DO we still have troops in Iraq? Is there still a conflict over there?

If you rely on the so-called mainstream media, you may have difficulty answering those questions these days. As Iraqi and Coalition forces pile up one success after another, Iraq has magically vanished from the headlines.

Want a real "inconvenient truth?" Progress in Iraq is powerful and accelerating.

But that fact isn't helpful to elite media commissars and cadres determined to decide the presidential race over our heads. How dare our troops win? Even worse, Iraqi troops are winning. Daily.

You won't see that above the fold in The New York Times. And forget the Obama-intoxicated news networks - they've adopted his story line that the clock stopped back in 2003.
To be fair to the quit-Iraq-and-save-the-terrorists media, they have covered a few recent stories from Iraq:

*When a rogue US soldier used a Koran for target practice, journalists pulled out all the stops to turn it into "Abu Ghraib, The Sequel."

Unforgivably, the Army handled the situation well. The "atrocity" didn't get the traction the whorespondents hoped for.

*When a battered, bleeding al Qaeda managed to set off a few bombs targeting Sunni Arabs who'd turned against terror, that, too, received delighted media play.

*As long as Baghdad-based journalists could hope that the joint US-Iraqi move into Sadr City would end disastrously, we were treated to a brief flurry of headlines.

*A few weeks back, we heard about another Iraqi company - 100 or so men - who declined to fight. The story was just delicious, as far as the media were concerned.

Then tragedy struck: As in Basra the month before, absent-without-leave (and hiding in Iran) Muqtada al Sadr quit under pressure from Iraqi and US troops. The missile and mortar attacks on the Green Zone stopped. There's peace in the streets.

Today, Iraqi soldiers, not militia thugs, patrol the lanes of Sadr City, where waste has replaced roadside bombs as the greatest danger to careless footsteps. US advisers and troops support the effort, but Iraq's government has taken another giant step forward in establishing law and order.

My fellow Americans, have you read or seen a single interview with any of the millions of Iraqis in Sadr City or Basra who are thrilled that the gangster militias are gone from their neighborhoods?

Didn't think so. The basic mission of the American media between now and November is to convince you, the voter, that Iraq's still a hopeless mess.

Meanwhile, they've performed yet another amazing magic trick - making Kurdistan disappear.
Remember the Kurds? Our allies in northern Iraq? When last sighted, they were living in peace and building a robust economy with regular elections, burgeoning universities and municipal services that worked.

After Israel, the most livable, decent place in the greater Middle East is Iraqi Kurdistan. Wouldn't want that news getting out.

If the Kurds would only start slaughtering their neighbors and bombing Coalition troops, they might get some attention. Unfortunately, there are no US or allied combat units in Kurdistan for Kurds to bomb. They weren't needed. And (benighted people that they are) the Kurds are pro-American - despite the virulent anti-Kurdish prejudices prevalent in our Saudi-smooching State Department.

Developments just keep getting grimmer for the MoveOn.org fan base in the media. Iraq's Sunni Arabs, who had supported al Qaeda and homegrown insurgents, now support their government and welcome US troops. And, in southern Iraq, the Iranians lost their bid for control to Iraq's government.

Bury those stories on Page 36.

Our troops deserve better. The Iraqis deserve better. You deserve better. The forces of freedom are winning.

Here in the Land of the Free, of course, freedom of the press means the freedom to boycott good news from Iraq. But the truth does have a way of coming out.

The surge worked. Incontestably. Iraqis grew disenchanted with extremism. Our military performed magnificently. More and more Iraqis have stepped up to fight for their own country. The Iraqi economy's taking off. And, for all its faults, the Iraqi legislature has accomplished far more than our own lobbyist-run Congress over the last 18 months.

When Iraq seemed destined to become a huge American embarrassment, our media couldn't get enough of it. Now that Iraq looks like a success in the making, there's a virtual news blackout.

Of course, the front pages need copy. So you can read all you want about the heroic efforts of the Chinese People's Army in the wake of the earthquake.

Tells you all you really need to know about our media: American soldiers bad, Red Chinese troops good.

Is Jane Fonda on her way to the earthquake zone yet?

Ralph Peters' new book, "Looking For Trouble: Adventures in a Broken World," hits stores on July 4.

http://moral.wjh.harvard.edu

2008-05-08T03:57:00.001+08:00

The scenarios you judged in this test pit means against ends, which is a common philosophical contrast. Each of the characters must choose whether to use bad means to acheive good ends -- for instance, whether to harm a single person in order to help many others. The statistic provided is an indication of the choices you made about means versus ends. The closer it is to 1, the more heavily you appeared to weight means (the rights of one); the closer it is to 7, the more heavily you appeared to weigh ends (the benefit of many). Your statistic is 6.7. So far, the average statistic for subjects on this test is 3.9. It is important to realize that this statistic is merely provided for your own interest. The MST researchers make no claims about its meaning, nor do we make any claims about what choices are right or wrong. If you refer other people to this test we ask that you do not describe this statistic or its derivation so that they may complete the test with an open mind. Thank you for your participation.

Infantry

2008-04-07T03:29:00.001+08:00

It might be from wikipedia, but it is particularly apt:

"Note that in some armies Light Infantry are usually considered as an elite, but in other countries they may be considered inferior due to their lack of equipment."

Lying, spin doctoring, obfuscation and cheating...

2008-03-25T16:01:00.001+08:00

these are the reasons why I have lost faith in Christianity.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2394,Lying-for-Jesus,Richard-Dawkins

When will reductio ad Hitlerum ever end!!!?!?!?!

2008-03-23T04:48:00.001+08:00

http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2008/03/21/creationism-evolution-and-nazis-yes-nazis/

Worshippers of Death (Wall Street Journal)

2008-03-04T21:38:00.001+08:00

By ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ
March 3, 2008

Zahra Maladan is an educated woman who edits a women's magazine in Lebanon. She is also a mother, who undoubtedly loves her son. She has ambitions for him, but they are different from those of most mothers in the West. She wants her son to become a suicide bomber.

At the recent funeral for the assassinated Hezbollah terrorist Imad Moughnaya -- the mass murderer responsible for killing 241 marines in 1983 and more than 100 women, children and men in Buenos Aires in 1992 and 1994 -- Ms. Maladan was quoted in the New York Times giving the following warning to her son: "if you're not going to follow the steps of the Islamic resistance martyrs, then I don't want you."

Zahra Maladan represents a dramatic shift in the way we must fight to protect our citizens against enemies who are sworn to kill them by killing themselves. The traditional paradigm was that mothers who love their children want them to live in peace, marry and produce grandchildren. Women in general, and mothers in particular, were seen as a counterweight to male belligerence. The picture of the mother weeping as her son is led off to battle -- even a just battle -- has been a constant and powerful image.

Now there is a new image of mothers urging their children to die, and then celebrating the martyrdom of their suicidal sons and daughters by distributing sweets and singing wedding songs. More and more young women -- some married with infant children -- are strapping bombs to their (sometimes pregnant) bellies, because they have been taught to love death rather than life. Look at what is being preached by some influential Islamic leaders:

"We are going to win, because they love life and we love death," said Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah. He has also said: "[E]ach of us lives his days and nights hoping more than anything to be killed for the sake of Allah." Shortly after 9/11, Osama bin Laden told a reporter: "We love death. The U.S. loves life. That is the big difference between us."

"The Americans love Pepsi-Cola, we love death," explained Afghani al Qaeda operative Maulana Inyadullah. Sheik Feiz Mohammed, leader of the Global Islamic Youth Center in Sydney, Australia, preached: "We want to have children and offer them as soldiers defending Islam. Teach them this: There is nothing more beloved to me than wanting to die as a mujahid." Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a speech: "It is the zenith of honor for a man, a young person, boy or girl, to be prepared to sacrifice his life in order to serve the interests of his nation and his religion."

How should Western democracies fight against an enemy whose leaders preach a preference for death?

The two basic premises of conventional warfare have long been that soldiers and civilians prefer living to dying and can thus be deterred from killing by the fear of being killed; and that combatants (soldiers) can easily be distinguished from noncombatants (women, children, the elderly, the infirm and other ordinary citizens). These premises are being challenged by women like Zahra Maladan. Neither she nor her son -- if he listens to his mother -- can be deterred from killing by the fear of being killed. They must be prevented from succeeding in their ghoulish quest for martyrdom. Prevention, however, carries a high risk of error. The woman walking toward the group of soldiers or civilians might well be an innocent civilian. A moment's hesitation may cost innocent lives. But a failure to hesitate may also have a price.

Late last month, a young female bomber was shot as she approached some shops in central Baghdad. The Iraqi soldier who drew his gun hesitated as the bomber, hands raised, insisted that she wasn't armed. The soldier and a shop owner finally opened fire as she dashed for the stores; she was knocked to the ground but still managed to detonate the bomb, killing three and wounding eight. Had the soldier and other bystanders not called out a warning to others -- and had they not shot her before she could enter the shops -- the death toll certainly would have been higher. Had he not hesitated, it might have been lower.

As more women and children are recruited by their mothers and their religious leaders to become suicide bombers, more women and children will be shot at -- some mistakenly. That too is part of the grand plan of our enemies. They want us to kill their civilians, who they also consider martyrs, because when we accidentally kill a civilian, they win in the court of public opinion. One Western diplomat called this the "harsh arithmetic of pain," whereby civilian casualties on both sides "play in their favor." Democracies lose, both politically and emotionally, when they kill civilians, even inadvertently. As Golda Meir once put it: "We can perhaps someday forgive you for killing our children, but we cannot forgive you for making us kill your children."

Civilian casualties also increase when terrorists operate from within civilian enclaves and hide behind human shields. This relatively new phenomenon undercuts the second basic premise of conventional warfare: Combatants can easily be distinguished from noncombatants. Has Zahra Maladan become a combatant by urging her son to blow himself up? Have the religious leaders who preach a culture of death lost their status as noncombatants? What about "civilians" who willingly allow themselves to be used as human shields? Or their homes as launching pads for terrorist rockets?

The traditional sharp distinction between soldiers in uniform and civilians in nonmilitary garb has given way to a continuum. At the more civilian end are babies and true noncombatants; at the more military end are the religious leaders who incite mass murder; in the middle are ordinary citizens who facilitate, finance or encourage terrorism. There are no hard and fast lines of demarcation, and mistakes are inevitable -- as the terrorists well understand.

We need new rules, strategies and tactics to deal effectively and fairly with these dangerous new realities. We cannot simply wait until the son of Zahra Maladan -- and the sons and daughters of hundreds of others like her -- decide to follow his mother's demand. We must stop them before they export their sick and dangerous culture of death to our shores.

Mr. Dershowitz teaches law at Harvard University and is the author of "Finding Jefferson" (Wiley, 2007).

Fanaticism

2008-02-19T01:23:00.001+08:00

Found this on a forum, and the OP found it on another forum...Although this post targets Islam, it is valid for all ideologies.

Dr. Emanual Tanay is a well known and well respected psychiatrist.
A German's point of view on Islam.

A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War ll owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism.

'Very few people were true Nazis 'he said,' but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.'

We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectra of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.

It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact is that the 'peaceful majority', the 'silent majority', is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managaed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War ll was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.

And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghanis, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

Military technology

2008-01-23T21:48:00.000+08:00

2 posts from DID that separately show the advances in technology and also how technology is limited.

Firstly, the QF-4:

"This is the first air-to-ground missile fired off an unmanned full-scale aerial target…. This test is an important part of the Det. 1 mission because it increases survivability of our Airmen going against (surface-to-air missile) threats. Furthermore, it's the first time the drone has been able to shoot back."

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/more-qf-4s-and-a-new-trick-for-old-dogs-04650/#more

Secondly, the A-10

The A-10 combines some of the best of today's high-technology Air Force with a solid, low-tech foundation. The addition of a targeting and laser-designation pod was a huge boost to the plane's capabilities, but still no substitute for the pilot's eyeballs.

"Most other aircraft rely heavily on (electronic) sensors to find and target the enemy," said Capt. Rick Mitchell, deployed here from the Air Force Reserve Command's 442nd Fighter Wing at Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo. "In the A-10, it's not unusual for a pilot to use binoculars."

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-majors-email-british-harrier-support-in-afghanistan-revisited-02661

It all goes to show that while technology is wonderful, we should not be so lost in the sea of electrons that we forget the basics.

More importantly, this highlights a capability that the RSAF lost with the A-4, Close Air Support. With the increasing emphasis on urban combat for the infantryman, I certainly hope they have some UAVs that can actually cover my ass rather than just report my doom :P

Combat Skills Badge

2007-12-17T19:01:00.000+08:00

Finally awarded my Combat Skills Badge more than 3 months after completing it! At least I won't feel so out of place now, with rank on my shoulders but no qualifications on my chest. Even though it is one of the easier skill badges, I think it at least shows that I can do the basics of what an infantryman is supposed to do.

Which brings me to my thought of the day:

I think that one of the intentions of the Combat Skills Badge was so that the infantry could have some 'pride'. However, I don't think that this intention was brought across properly. Walking across grassy, muddy, sandy, rocky, hilly terrain as well as doing a river crossing encompasses all the foot(non-motorised) movement that an infantryman is expected to do. The CSB differentiates the Infantry from the Armoured Infantry, which is expected to work more closely with vehicles, and is thus expected to do less foot movement. The technical handling tests and equipment handling tests shows that the Infantryman is capable of handling his weapons and equipment well, and the tests for all the organic weapons of an infantry section shows how the Infantryman is expected to be able to perform all the roles of the buddies in his section. Finally, the range after the 32km Route March shows how the Infantryman is expected to be able to fire his weapon and kill the enemy even when he is tired, wet and hungry.

The above is why I disagree that the CSB 32km should be treated as a 'Technical' exercise and should be treated as a 'Tactical' exercise. Sometimes I feel that in the drive to quantify gains and measure performance, we are missing out on the intangibles that motivate people. Like my Guards friend, Eng Soon, told me, the Guards Conversion Course is not just about learning to do the stuff that a Guardsman is expected to do, like heli-rappelling, but also about inculcating the Guards Culture into a person.

The Infantry has always been the basic arm of any army, which is why it is sometimes looked down upon. But as the war in Iraq shows, high technology can only do so much. In the end, it is boots on the ground that give a military effective control of a piece of land. And no one arm is more well situated to provide those boots on the ground than the common doughboy, the Infantry. This is how we can start to give the Infantry, the largest formation in our Army, in any army, pride.

Biofuel's hidden costs

2007-12-16T16:26:00.000+08:00

Just read an article about how the increasing use of maize-derived alcohol for vehicle fuel has driven up prices of cereal and is hurting the 3 billion poor people around the world. Maybe this will prompt people to think more about the hidden costs of 'environmentally-friendly' fuel and other items.. Is it worth it to starve other people so that you can feel better about yourself?

GEN. Eric Shinseki (Retd.)...

2007-12-09T07:40:00.000+08:00

...holds special interest for me because he was the one who pushed through the implementation of the Stryker, something which we (Infantry) are going to be doing soon. The story about him and the Iraq war is even more interesting, however. I quote from Wiki:

No, Major Montague shot back, it was more complicated: the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the top commanders were part of the decision to send in a small invasion force and not enough troops for the occupation. Only Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, the Army chief of staff who was sidelined after he told Congress that it would take several hundred thousand troops in Iraq, spoke up in public. “You didn’t hear any of them at the time, other than General Shinseki, screaming, saying that this was untenable,” Major Montague said.

However it's also clear to these officers that publically stating contrary opinions comes with a high cost:

Yet, Major Hardaway said, General Shinseki had shown there was a great cost, at least under Mr. Rumsfeld. “Evidence shows that when you do that in uniform, bad things can happen,” he said. “So, it’s sort of a dichotomy of, should I do the right thing, even if I get punished?”

It seems that the same thing is occuring in the UK, at least judging from public forums and news reports.

I hope that our NS policy means that there will be less disconnect between politicians and the military.

How Technology Almost Lost the War: In Iraq, the Critical Networks Are Social — Not Electronic

2007-12-01T09:25:00.001+08:00

With the ever increasing emphasis on technological sophistication, let us not forget that what wins wars is not hardware but heartware...

http://www.wired.com/politics/security/magazine/15-12/ff_futurewar

Let this be a warning to all about how easily religion can be abused

2007-11-27T21:02:00.000+08:00

British Teacher Faces 40 Lashes for Naming Class Teddy Bear 'Muhammad'

A British primary school teacher arrested in Sudan faces up to 40 lashes for blasphemy after letting her class of 7-year-olds name a teddy bear Muhammad.

Gillian Gibbons, 54, from Liverpool, was arrested at at Khartoum's Unity High School yesterday, and accused of insulting the Prophet of Islam.

Her colleagues said that they feared for her safety after reports that groups of young men had gathered outside the Khartoum police station where she was taken and were shouting death threats.

The Unity school is a Christian-run but multi-racial and co-educational private school that is popular with Sudanese professionals and expatriate workers.

Bishop Ezekiel Kondo, chairman of the school council, told The Times that the school was in dispute with authorities over taxes, and suggested that Gibbons, who arrived in Khartoum in August, may have been caught up in that.

"The thing may be very simple but there are people who are trying to make it bigger. It's a kind of blackmail," he said.

Teachers at the school, in central Khartoum, a mile from the Nile River, said that Gibbons had made an innocent mistake by letting her pupils choose their favorite name for the toy as part of a school project.

Robert Boulos, the Unity director, said Gibbons was following a British National Curriculum course designed to teach young pupils about animals and their habitats. This year’s animal was the bear.

In September, she asked a girl to bring in her teddy bear to help the class focus and then asked the children to name the toy.

“They came up with eight names including Abdullah, Hassan and Muhammad. Then she explained what it meant to vote and asked them to choose the name,” Boulos said.

Twenty out of the 23 children chose Muhammad. Each child was allowed to take the bear home for weekends and asked to keep a diary about what they did with the toy. Each entry was collected in a book with a picture of the bear on the cover, next to the message "My name is Muhammad."

Boulos said that the bear itself was not marked or labeled with the name in any way, adding that Sudanese police had now seized the book and asked to interview the 7-year-old girl who brought in the bear.

He said that he had decided to close down the school until January for fear of reprisals in Sudan’s predominantly Muslim capital.

“This is a very sensitive issue. We are very worried about her safety,” he said. “This was a completely innocent mistake. Ms. Gibbons would have never wanted to insult Islam.”

The British Embassy in Khartoum said that it was still unclear whether Gibbons had been charged formally. “We are following it up with the authorities and trying to meet her in person,” it said.

Under Sudan's Sharia law, blasphemy could attract a large fine, 40 lashes or a jail term of up to six months.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312895,00.html

Robert Goulet : If Ever I Would Leave You

2007-11-25T00:51:00.000+08:00

If ever I would leave you
It wouldn't be in summer.
Seeing you in summer I never would go.
Your hair streaked with sun-light,
Your lips red as flame,
Your face witha lustre
that puts gold to shame!

But if I'd ever leave you,
It couldn't be in autumn.
How I'd leave in autumn I never will know.
I've seen how you sparkle
When fall nips the air.
I know you in autumn
And I must be there.

And could I leave you
running merrily through the snow?
Or on a wintry evening
when you catch the fire's glow?

If ever I would leave you,
How could it be in spring-time?
Knowing how in spring I'm bewitched by you so?
Oh, no! not in spring-time!
Summer, winter or fall!
No, never could I leave you at all!

http://www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/camelot/ifeveriwouldleaveyou.htm

Weird dream...

2007-10-26T19:31:00.000+08:00

I just had the weirdest dream... I dreamt that I was assembling a SAW, but the fire selector was of the M16 type.. which I remember clearly because I first assembled it upside down... once I put in the butt stock my alarm clock went off... hmm.

Between the devil and the deep blue sea...

2007-06-19T18:50:00.000+08:00

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070617/ap_on_bi_ge/ethanol_refineries;_ylt=AntmaLHebvkdB4h9dQ9d0Ahu24cA

Increased governmental support for renewable fuels = less incentive to build fossil fuel refineries = higher fossil fuel prices

True cost of renewable resources = higher taxes + higher travelling expenses?

Back at last!

2007-06-11T17:05:00.000+08:00

Its good to be back. A few points to note:

1) Singapore is more humid than it is hot... in my opinion that is.
2) You never realise how much you don't sweat in london until you get back to singapore and gotta get used to the slightly sticky feeling on your skin again
3) You never realise how much easier it is to breathe in london as compared to singapore, until you get back and try to breathe the much thicker, humid air
4) Anti-jetlag 101: Once you get on the plane, change your watch to the destination time and try to live as though you were already there. Also, arriving in the morning and enduring the day without sleep and then sleeping normally at night is the best way to combat jet lag... i even went for a run today and felt fine! (except for point 3 above)

On the good side:

5) You realise how much poorer the food in london is, and its good to know that you havent gone crazy fantasizing about singapore food because it really is as good as you think it is. =)
6) For those flying SIA, i felt tt the food has improved since i flew to london 9 months ago. Or maybe I just miss singaporean food too much =P

Stop donating to the poor...you are only making it worse?!?!

2007-06-07T21:39:00.000+08:00

Interesting read of an interview by a Kenyan economist begging, not for more money, but for less.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,363663,00.html

I'm no economist, but the case studies that he presents, if true, are quite compelling. For example, he states that if, during a mild food shortage, the rest of the world donates food to african countries, the farmers in the country will be undercut and thus some will give up farming, ensuring that the next time round, there is even less food, resulting in more aid, and so on. In the meantime, the jobless farmer goes and asks for aid. He is basically saying that giving aid to africa encourages the people to just freeload, and alot of the aid goes to the corrupt politicians anyway. I can't verify what he is saying, but it is an interesting viewpoint you should take note of the next time you donate money, whether it is to a country, and organisation or a person. The situation seems alot like the worst qualities of a welfare state.

The Law of Unintended Consequences

2007-06-05T21:30:00.000+08:00

Odex, the notoriously unreliable anime distributor fining illegal anime downloaders in co-operation with SingNet, with no apparent legal authority.

NETS, the equivalent of debit cards in Singapore before debit cards became popular raising its prices...in conjuction with the rise in GST.

Seems like people will be even more disinclined to 1)Buy Anime locally 2)Use SingNet 3)Use NETS.

I wonder if these companies did a proper Cost-Benefit analysis before going ahead with their actions? Maybe thieves will become more prevalent in Singapore as a result of more hard cash in wallets... :(

Super Mario in 3D... with a twist!

2007-06-05T05:35:00.000+08:00

Check this out! Play super mario in 3D.... but different! Change from normal 2D view to 3D and u find that mario and his enemies will become paper thin (i.e. a 2D plane in 3D space) and u can side step ur enemies instead of jumping on them! really makes me wanna get the Wii. Check it out!

http://www.wired.com/gaming/gamingreviews/commentary/games/2007/06/gamesfrontier_0604

Bush's lasting legacy?

2007-06-02T19:17:00.000+08:00

"Presidential hopefuls rally the faithful in US" --Article in Straits Times, today.

Seems like seperation of church and state is no longer feasible in American politics, at least at the present moment. Thanks a LOT Mr. Bush. Looks like the war against terror is going to become even more like a religious war, and we all know how religious wars turn out =(

At the same time, Malaysia has blasted the international media for decrying the death of religious freedom in their country. If you will forgive the analogy, that's like China denying that the Tiananmen massacre occured. In both cases, freedom was lost--if it existed in the first place.

Malaysia, Truly Hypocritical

2007-05-31T18:23:00.000+08:00

Any doubts that Malaysia was not a secular state have been laid to rest today by a judgement by the Malaysian Federal Court that a muslim cannot convert to another religion.
The panel voted 2-1 against the matter of her conversion, and the dissenting judge was the only non-muslim on the panel.
This decision not only affects the woman in question, but also many others whose cases are pending in lower courts. Some of these people originally converted to Islam and wanted to convert back.
Seems like, in Malaysia at least, Islam is like Hotel California: You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.
Further, the decision directly goes against the freedom of religion enshrined in the federal constitution of Malaysia.

So remember folks, if you live in Malaysia, or any other country where there are similar situations, think, think and think again before committing to any one religion. Even if the patron deity of the religion isn't jealous, the priests and imams certainly are :P

Given this, and the many other cases where the rights of non-muslims are ignored in favour of the rights of muslims in Malaysia... well, I don't really have to complete the sentence.

But DAMN!

Can you spell I.R.O.N.Y ?

2007-05-25T02:58:00.000+08:00

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_5944929?source%3Dpoll.3AC27EC5B8BA9A6FF6D40C6A78375503.html

Synopsis: Lightning damages a statue of Jesus. Congregation gets worried. Nun says that it is just a freak accident of nature.

I guess all things that don't go your way are freak accidents while the things that do go your way are the acts of God. Hypocrisy FTW!

Quote from South Park: If irony were made out of strawberries we'd all be having smoothies right now ;)

+1 for homosexual rights!

2007-05-23T00:37:00.000+08:00

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070521/od_afp/britainanimalsgay_070521160344;_ylt=ArAYz5gWeX2acXt.F9P79c_MWM0F

Synopsis: A pair of gay flamingos are raising a chick at the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT) in Slimbridge near Bristol.

There goes the argument that homosexuality is unnatural :P

(Blind) Faith

2007-05-20T23:26:00.000+08:00

John 20:29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed"

That was the passage that we pondered today in church, and I think that this passage is one of the main points of contention between people of faith and people of science. As usual, there was a 3 point sermon, and I would like to use this sermon to illustrate certain aspects of Christianity in comparison to rationality.

The first point the preacher made was that questions are common among Christians. He said that there was some guy who went to Bible College because he had lots of questions, and he wanted them answered. After he graduated, he had even more questions, but apparently continued to "walk with the Lord". He used this to illustrate the point that everybody has questions and that having questions is normal.

He then went on to say that even though there are questions, they should not affect your fundamental belief in the christian God, and that belief in the christian God despite the questions you have is a good thing to do.

Finally, he went on to use Pascal's Wager as a justification for people to continue being christians even if they are having serious doubts, and says that eventually things will work out.

Since I am writing this post you will already know that I have problems with his statements.

Firstly, about his assertion that many senior Christians have questions as well. I hope that you all notice that even if this is true, these senior Christians certainly waste no time publicising their doubts. In fact, most public statements of Churches do not waffle and leave no room for doubt. They are proclamations ex cathedra, and no one is supposed to argue with them. I wonder if questions are so common and natural, why does the Church, and all religious groups, go out of their way to suppress any questions that are asked publicly? They hide behind the shield of religious tolerance, and say that any questioning of their beliefs is intolerance. If Christians truly embrace questioning as a way to get to the truth, they should, for example, answer questions such as: Why is there no evidence at all for the exodus and other major miracles of the Bible? Why are certain pieces of literature, contemporary to the books of the Bible and providing alternative views, excluded from the Bible and ignored (except when they support what is written in the Bible)?

Next, about the declaration that we should continue to believe even when we have questions, and its justification using Pascal's Wager. Pascal's Wager has been shown to be a circular argument, and thus can not justify anything. I was surprised that the preacher actually used it. If a person cannot find a better reason to believe than Pascal's Wager, go read up on the logical errors of the Wager, stop believing and start questioning!

Finally, and the greatest problem I see with the sermon, is the bold statement that those who believe without seeing (i.e. without evidence) are truly blessed, as stated in the verse above. Faith: To believe without reason. The big problem with this can be summarised in this quote by Voltaire: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. The history of religious is littered with illustrations of that statement. This, the idea that we should believe in things that have no proof, is only one step away from the idea that we should believe in things despite proof to the contrary, which is something that Christianity is edging towards, what with the recent archaeological findings that there was no mass migration of the Jews out of egypt, which invalidates one of the founding stories of the Bible.

Remember: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. If there is a God, I would think that he would respect the intellectual honesty of questioning him in order to discern the truth, instead of the blind faith in the sayings and interpretations of a flawed book by flawed men.

Now, to dispel 2 major misconceptions of science and reason:
1) Scientists have 'faith' in their work the same way that Christians have faith in God.
As I said above, the Christian faith in God is without evidence, or even in the face of contrary evidence. Scientists have 'faith' in their work because they produce results. They work! The day you see electrons stop flowing through a wire or you find human bones with dinosaur bones is the day where you will see scientists scrambling to find an alternative theory that works. On the contrary, the Church espouses values and beliefs whether they work or not.

2) The idea that there is no God is a faith similar to the idea that there is a God.
Not at all. People (Atheists) say that there is no evidence for a God. The burden of proof is on those who say that there is something rather than nothing. The reason this misconception comes about can be illustrated by the following:

a) I say that I believe there is a teacup in orbit around mars, so I have to provide evidence for the teacup.
b) I say that I believe there is no teacup in orbit around mars, then I also have to provide evidence for the teacup.
c) I say that there is no evidence for a teacup in orbit around mars, thus there is no reason to believe in the teacup.
d) I say that there is no evidence for a teacup in orbit around mars, thus I cannot say whether there is a teacup or not.

All people of religion belong to group a. Many people think that atheists belong to group b. In reality, atheists belong to group c. And of course, agnostics belong to group d. I hope this helps clarify what people think about atheists, and the difference between atheists and agnostics.

Pro-Beijing lawmaker denies Tiananmen Square 'massacre'

2007-05-16T20:14:00.000+08:00

What an interesting coincidence! After talking about rising Chinese(PRC) nationalism yesterday, today the article mentioned in the title appears on The Straits Times! The good news is, the denial was immediately met with cries of outrage from the media and other lawmakers. So at least not everybody has lost their mind or is being controlled by the Communist Party of China.

The bad news is, I think that this is just a start. I am pretty sure that the lawmakers comments were designed to test the waters to see what the PRC government can get away with. We already know that the PRC government doesn't acknowledge the millions of deaths during the Cultural Revolution caused by the policies of Mao Zedong (more people, I might mention, than the Japanese killed in their invasion of the PRC). On a more humorous note, the PRC didn't participate in the 1960 Paralympic games because " there were no disabled people in China".

At the same time, the PRC Navy has just fielded a missile designed to take out American carriers. This, after their anti-satellite missile tests. The PRC is also aggressively pursuing relationships with african nations in order to secure the Indian Ocean. Which, I might mention, is not looked upon kindly by the Indians themselves.

You can draw your own conclusions from this facts.

Chinese nationalism... from a Taiwan pop group?!?!

2007-05-15T21:03:00.000+08:00

Just got recommended this song by my girlfriend... watch it here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnszYWDkyDc (somehow youtube doesnt recognise my blog)

Translations are here for all those (like me) who couldn't get the words clearly: http://www.chinesemusicblog.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=2906&action=new

Basically song is gloating about how, after the long years of chinese people having trouble with learning english, now the rest of the world has to learn chinese! Which is true, but the tone of the song rubs me up the wrong way. You don't hear any songs extolling the virtue of the english languange over chinese, french or malay, do you?

Another interesting thing is how S.H.E, a Taiwanese female pop group, is singing it. True, the chinese language is called pu tong hua in china, but the title, zhong guo hua, translates literally as China's Language, where the China refers to the PRC rather than the ROC. Pro-unification feelings perhaps?

Back to the tone of the song rubbing me up the wrong way. As I said before, you don't often hear of songs in one language promoting that language and denigrating other languages. The whole thing smells to me like Chinese nationalism raising its ugly head. Only now, the propaganda is even more subtle and designed to reach out to chinese all over the world (esp. Taiwan perhaps?) through a popular pop group. I mean, the feeling I get from the song is: Mwaahahahahaha, now you have to learn MY language. Bow down to me!

Its for reasons like this, among other things such as the news almost every other month that some chinese have been caught stealing US military technology that really makes me wonder:

How truthful is the chinese government when they say that all they want is to grow peacefully?

Why are churches jumping onto the global aid bandwagon?

2007-05-14T00:00:00.000+08:00

Just today I sat through a sermon where the pastor exhorted us to take the government to task about broken promises. The Western nations had apparently promised in 2000 to halve world poverty by 2015 and now that it is 2007. Although we are halfway there, the work is not halfway done. Just a few weeks ago there were articles commenting about this and various welfare groups talking about taking the government to task, and today the church I attend heavily promoted the idea that we should "blow the whistle" and spam the government with letters to "encourage" them to buck up. I drew two major messages in the sermon, which are: 1) Christianity strongly supports helping the weak and 2)The (secular) government has failed and a (christian) government would do much better. I feel that both positions are untenable.

First of all, the pastor quoted the following admonisment to the Jews just after they left egypt:(paraphrased) Just as you were foreigners in egypt and treated well you should treat the widowed and orphans with kindness etc. where the widowed and orphaned represented the weak and the suffering. This is all well and good, except for the fact that after that, the Jews, under the command of God, conquered quite a few cities. And thats not all. The widowed
(i.e. women whose husbands had just been killed in battle) were slaughtered and the orphans (female) were "taken as wives", which is a pretty good euphemism if I say so myself. How about the male orphans? Well, they were killed as well, being of no use to the Jewish men.

Of course, there are Christians who do charitable works and attribute their drive to their religion. The sermon ostentatiously glorifies these people. But, let us not forget that people from other religions, Muslims, Buddhists, do exactly the same thing. Why don't the religious groups get together and co-operate? Clearly there would be greater efficiencies in centralising certain operations. Here comes the catch: active evangelism goes on along with the charitable works, so there is an ulterior motive behind these works. Most of us are well acquainted with the image of a saintly Mother Theresa, and for Christians she acts as a mascot for the benign and beneficial image that Christians want to promote to the rest of the world. Even secular commentators have to acknowledge that Mother Theresa has brought lots of good to the poor in Calcutta, right? Well, maybe. But there is evidence that Mother Theresa isn't as saintly as she seems to be. In spite of the large amount of funds that are donated to her works, the condition of the homes that she runs for the poor has hardly improved. It seems like instead of using the money to help the poor, a large part of it goes towards the establishment of churches and the promotion of Catholicism per se. http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/490/theresa.htm

With that thought in mind, let us consider a reason that the preacher conveniently forgot to mention that could have led to the government failing to meet its goal for the alleviation of poverty. National Interest: In 2000, when the promise was made, the Asian Financial Crisis had more or less ended and people were feeling pretty optimistic about the future. Thus, promises to help other nations and the poor made alot of (political) sense. Afterall, if the people are already pretty happy with their lives, it helps to show that you are caring and all that. Then came September 11, and for UK, the June 6, which just about wrecked the sense of well-being of the people. With the subsequent wars, the ramping up of security procedures and the downturn in the economy, no government was going to be as generous. People who question where the money went can look to this for answers. I'm pretty sure there are many other reasons but thats not the point.

The big question is, why are Churches suddenly promoting this, as well as the environmental agenda? Well, I think that there are quite a few reasons, and they aren't the ones that Christians think they are. I'm pretty sure that when questioned, the leaders of the Churches would go on about how this was a problem that was swept under the rug etc. and how the Bible tells us to do good and all that. The problem with this explanation is that for a pretty long time, prominent Christians like Pat Robertson have been rubbishing these environmental claims, and questions can also be asked about why is it only at the halfway mark that the Church is taking the government to task about the poverty issue.

The answer, I think, comes from the fact that these issues have only come to the publics attention very recently. Afterall, a year ago there was no global concensus on global warming, and there was no well publicized push by activists on the poverty issue. Only recently, when the public are begining to speak out about it, is the Church suddenly jumping out in front, loudly leading the pack and trying to get recognition for doing so. Pat Robertson now heavily pushes the environmental message.

Why the rapid turnabout? Because it can help them attract converts. A green Church that advocates aid to the poor will certainly seem better to those who have fallen away from the Church because it was irrelevant to their lives. If the Church can find verses in the Bible that show that it was what God wanted all along, so much the better. At the same time, the Church can criticize the secular government for its failings and convince adherents that having more christianity in politics is a good thing.

Am I condemning the actions of the Church? Yes and no. I am pretty certain that the Church, being what it is, will be able to mobilize large numbers of adherents to support the two good causes. And this is a good thing. But those who have stars in their eyes about the issue should rub their eyes well and take a second look: The Church is doing this for its own benefit, as it always has.

The problem with focusing too much on religion...

2007-05-11T23:53:00.000+08:00

One big problem I have with some people who are too devoutly Christian is how they ignore the people around them. My mother is certainly one of them, and just recently another event occured that reminded me of this.

One of my friends has been having trouble finding a place to stay next year. This was entirely by choice because my household offered her a place to stay and she rejected it. Regardless, my household still continued to help her find a place to stay with other people. Eventually, another friend in the household managed to hear about an available place and immediately contacted her and helped her arrange for a place to stay. Now, if I were that formerly homeless friend, I would be absolutely grateful and at least buy the guy a drink or two. Seems pretty reasonable, doesn't it? Rather than acknowledge the friend who helped her, she instead publicly gave thanks to God both at dinner time and on her blog, not mentioning the friend indeed at all! In fact, when the friend jokingly asked her for some reward, she very reluctantly conceeded at all.

Now, I'm sure the helpful friend would never want for any appreciation, but some giving of thanks to the PERSON would certainly be the right thing to do. Instead of choosing to do the right thing, this friend instead ignored the person who helped her and chose to promote her religion and the idea that God's help pops out of the sky and we should all be grateful for some Deus ex Machina.

Isn't that the damnest thing?

Interesting note for all those who blame the holocaust on an atheistic Hitler...

2007-05-11T03:46:00.000+08:00

"We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out".

Source: Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, Oxford University Press, 1942

Why the second law of thermodynamics cannot be used as an argument for the existence of a supreme being

2007-05-10T19:22:00.000+08:00

From Wikipedia:

Complex systems

It is occasionally claimed that the second law is incompatible with autonomous self-organisation, or even the coming into existence of complex systems. The entry self-organisation explains how this claim is a misconception.

In fact, as hot systems cool down in accordance with the second law, it is not unusual for them to undergo spontaneous symmetry breaking, i.e. for structure to spontaneously appear as the temperature drops below a critical threshold. Complex structures, such as Bénard cells, also spontaneously appear where there is a steady flow of energy from a high temperature input source to a low temperature external sink. It is conjectured that such systems tend to evolve into complex, structured, critically unstable "edge of chaos" arrangements, which very nearly maximise the rate of energy degradation (the rate of entropy production).

A good read for all Christians: The Archaeology of the Exodus

2007-04-30T22:12:00.000+08:00

http://hotcupofjoe.blogspot.com/2007/04/archaeology-of-exodus.html

Self-explanatory

The Ten Commandments was a very epic movie...

2007-04-29T22:31:00.000+08:00

Unfortunately, as the following blog purports to show, there is no evidence for it and much of the book of exoodus... and the blogger presents some good evidence for it! A pretty interesting read for all.

http://hotcupofjoe.blogspot.com/search/label/religion

Just watched Jesus Camp...

2007-04-27T22:21:00.000+08:00

In my opinion, it is the strongest evidence ever that every religion has its crackpots. Also, that these crackpots are being allowed to brainwash/indoctrinate children because of the moderate majority. The biggest problem with religion is that it supresses critical thinking. If/when Pax Americana no longer holds, I'll bet that the rise of the religious fundamentalist in American contributed majorly to the fall. The film left me disappointed in the world today. :(

Looong video on Youtube

2007-04-26T06:08:00.000+08:00

Its two hours long, I've only watched 15 mins, but I think its a pretty good video for all to watch. It is biased against intelligent design (of course) but would give all a better understanding of the issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg&eurl=

edit: It is not only a good argument against intelligent design, it is a good argument against religion and politics, and it is a good argument for the importance of science to the current geo-political state of Pax Americana.

If you can't see the humour in this...

2007-04-22T05:41:00.001+08:00

http://www.atomfilms.com/film/jesus_off.jsp?channelKeyword=channel_religious_heresy

Happy Birthday!

2007-03-12T06:13:00.000+08:00

Sis. Sorry I cldnt give u a present this year =P you'll have to wait 3 months for it.

We can and must apply contemporary standards to analyse the past.

2007-03-12T05:36:00.000+08:00

A comment in the previous post made the point that: "you can't like use our current standards to justify what happened thousands of years ago." On the contrary, we can and must use the standards of today to analyse the past. This is the only way we can learn from history and apply its lessons. How much use would history be if all that is said about it is:" Oh, thats how people do things in the past and so it is ok." For example, Hitler's anti-semitism was not unique in the early 20th century. In fact anti-semitism was widespread throughout most of the western world. Can we justify his anti-semitism based on the fact that it was just how things were done in the past? Clearly not.
Note, further, that I am treating the Bible as an accurate historical source in this discussion, which, considering some parts of the Bible, may be more than what it deserves. The part about Midianites leading the people of Israel astray holds about as much water as some Muslim fundamentalists justifying attacks on the rest of the world 'because they are leading us astray'. The adage: 'The victors write the history' also comes to mind.
The part about God having no obligation towards the Midianites clearly shows the fallacy that I denounced during the previous post, that of using the divine to justify whatever evil is done. Recall also that we only see this battle from one side, that of the victorious israelites. The Lord's Prayer itself goes: Lord, lead us not into temptation. Not Lord, help us kill all those who tempt us. And their families. And their livestock. And raze their land to the ground.
"And anyway, it doesn't mean that God is cruel and unjust now just because he unleashed his wrath onto whole nations in the old testament since the way God and Man is related now, is not the same as in OT times with the arrival of Jesus."
Yes, it does not mean so. But it does mean that he was cruel and unjust then. If the way God and Man are related have changed, presumably for the better since the arrival of Jesus, would that not mean that it was worse in the past? If that was so, then God clearly made a correction to our divine relationship, which means that there was a mistake in the relationship. Now, some will jump in now and say that the mistake was that man chose fruit from the tree of wisdom etc, thus putting all the blame onto man.(This is another argument for another time). But if so, then God took quite a long time and let a lot of people die needlessly before he decided that we have suffered enough and correct it. Is this really a God that you want to believe in? Recall Deuteronomy 24:16 which states: "Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin."

Anonymous posters don't have the guts to stand up for what they are saying...

2007-03-10T11:24:00.000+08:00

but ill reply to them anyway. Because not many comments deserve to be ignored outright.

Firstly, given that Richard Dawkins doesn't try to justify genocide* while Lee Strobel does, yes, I do give more weight to his arguments.

Secondly, Isiah 55 v8-9 says: "For my thoughts are not your thoughts. Neither are your ways my ways," declares the Lord. As the heavens are higher than the earth so are my ways higher than youre ways and my thoughts from your thoughts. (NIV)

I take the anonymous poster quoting this to mean that I should realise that the Lord works in mysterious ways and, to put things bluntly, accept things as they are, sweep them under the carpet and carry on.
I cannot do so, for is not the whole point of religion to try to understand what divine being(s) exist are thinking and thus do (and believe) things pleasing in their sight in return for whatever graces they allow us? Then, also, there are clearly some thoughts of the Lord which we can understand (or strive to) which leads to whatever religion document and guidelines that we live by.
Thus, even if the quote is the absolute truth, it does not mean that we should stop questioning the world around us. Upon this continuous questioning is our modern society built. I might mention that the Church has been, is and will for the foreseeable future be supressing this continuous questioning in various areas. Whether this supression of knowledge is beneficial is up for debate.

The reason why I am personally biased against some of what Lee Strobel says is because I have had good friends who actually do believe what he says. The problem is not with the inordinate killing extending to lifestock, I mean, it is a wasteful tactic with land that you would wish to occupy as the ancient israelis did, but one that might pay off in the long term in reputation, thus justifying the cost, and such occurances might have been run of the mill in those days; the problem is that these people used a divine being to justify their actions--- and people nowadays think that their justification was valid! Now, divine justification for actions is pretty common even nowadays, but when your average person, group or nation decides to annihilate the opposition just because they claim to have divine inspiration, you'd at least like to see them justify themselves in a court of law right?

I have heard of a study conducted in western countries where two groups of children(neither with racial or cultural ties to the factions in the 2 versions of the story, where one version simplifies to: " The israelites were justified in the invasion and killing of the midianites." In this version, the children agreed with the story and immediately came up with justifications like: The Lord told them to do so. When Israelites and midianites were replaced with present day countries, the children disagreed with the story and immediately questioned the intentions of the agressor. The moral of the story is that religions are powerful weapons that can be used to remove reasoning from the equation of determining right and wrong. This, I believe, is a dangerous abuse of religion which should be stopped.

Matthew 7:3 goes: Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

How can anybody condemn some religious fanatics for their assaults when they themselves believe in a flawed ideology?

*Genocide is the mass killing of a group of people as defined by Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide(CPPCG) as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
Given that the Israelites and the Midianites were both considered peoples as narrated in the bible, I believe the massacre of the Midianites can be considered genocide.

The Case for Faith...NOT!!!

2007-02-25T18:41:00.000+08:00

In my opinion this book has done more to convince me that there are sick, twisted and depraved parts of christianity existing in the world today than any other thing I have seen or book I have read. The unrepentably apolegetic tone of the book towards Christianity, under a fascade of critical thinking sickens me. I could tolerate the logical fallacies and arguments based on false premises of the first 3 chapters, but the worst was the chapter that tried to explain away the cruelties clearly stated in the Old Testament by either: 1)Attributing it to poor translation in the King James Version or 2)Demonising the victims. I mean, seriously, can anybody truly accept this crap? I think most people just ignore it and get on with their lives, which is the best thing to do in most cases, I think.

Reading...

2007-02-25T07:21:00.000+08:00

The Case for Faith now, by some guy called Lee Strobel. Lent to me by my well meaning neighbour. Slow going, full of arguments from authority, false analogies and circular reasoning. ESPECIALLY arguments from authority. Must be something about Christianity that makes this sort of fallacy common; I've seen it in quite a few books I've read so far.

Page 43-51 of the first chapter of the main argument as an example of faulty reasoning--first he appeals to the fact that finite humans cannot understand an infinite God, and therefore certain evils are tolerated for the greater good. Then he limits God by defining Him by human definitions: That an All-powerful God cannot commit mistakes, therefore claiming to understand one aspect of God.* If this Lee Strobel guy can claim to understand this part of God, why can't another person claim to understand another aspect? He does use the clever technique of seperating these two parts of the contradiction with another case study in between to conceal the fallacy though.

Two other aspects trouble me.
1) In the Old Testament, God does change his mind. Ref: Book of Jonah. Given that God is all knowing...
2) The acceptance of the premise that certain evils can and should be tolerated for the greater good is a very dangerous thing. For example, it could lead to the acceptance of the persecution of various groups (numbering 6 million) for the improvement in the life, morale and overall outlook of the remaining 81.1 million people. After all, it is only 6.8% of the population that is affected adversely, right? People may accept evil for the greater good but this acceptance should be entirely voluntary.

*Ref direct quote: Even an all-powerful God could not have created a world in which people had genuine freedom and yet there was no potentiality for sin, because our freedom includes the possibility of sin within its own meaning.

Seems logical right? But remember that if this argument is logical, then we would have to apply finite human definitions to an infinite God and so Lee Strobel is commiting the very same thing he condemned as wrong.

It is really, REALLY hard to find the fallacies in religious arguments, and many people like myself often fail to do so. But, remember that these arguments have been honed over centuries and centuries of debate, so the fallacies should be hard to find or else the arguments would be thrown out altogether already! So, don't give up.

A constantly questioning mind is the only thing that leads to progress. And if you do believe in anything divine, I'm sure that divine being would appreciate someone who constantly questions rather than someone who is satisfied that the truth has been found and that is all there is to it, which is what most monotheistic religions would like to have you believe.

exasperated...

2007-02-15T08:23:00.000+08:00

Deeply unsatisfying cell today... as usual. This is the first time I am blogging about it though.

Sometimes I just can't understand the christian form of logic. Let's start with chinese new year greetings. An innocent discussion about chinese new year turned into how some christians do not wish others gong xi fa cai and do not allow others to do the same, which means something like congratulations and may you strike it rich, purely on the basis of how striking it rich contains an element of luck, because, apparently, luck excludes God from the equation. Why can't God work through the process of blind chance? (in this case, whereas evolution isn't blind chance, but thats for another time) Isn't that restricting what God can or cannot do? (Note: This will turn up again) But I digress. The most important thing is about how they do not allow others to say it too, which I have observed now from 2 friends and family as well. It may well be 4 words, but if a simple greeting can be disallowed on the basis of flawed reasoning, how tolerant would a religious government be?

I say the above because of the dangerous call recently in my church for more christians to be involved in politics, from the grassroots to the national level. I find this an affont to all those who have suffered due to religious persecution and our current secular democracy.(And lets not forget, Christians have done their fair share of persecution. In fact, as one talkshow host mentioned, the Christians have kicked the Muslims ass in terms of body count when it comes to persecution). In case anyone forgot, the last time europe combined religious and political power was the dark ages!

Enough about that. Back to the cell session. The highlight of the session was a discussion about cause and effect, and the evil in the world. After a lengthy discussion where they put up false analogies like how parents cannot control their children (environment has its effect, and God controls the environment as well), the cell leaders fell back on the defence that God 'merely' allowed evil to happen as a result of free will, and that he could not do anything about it. On further challenge, they conceeded that an omnipotent God could change it but did not want to, for a reason that is beyond us. The argument that what we cannot understand is God's doing and beyond us is flawed and dangerous, and often bandied around today, regardless of the fact that science has always been about understanding that which is beyond us, but I digress again. The argument boils down to one simple thing: If you were walking down a street, and saw a rape in progress, and could stop it, and just did nothing but allowed it to happen, was your action good?

I put forward that regardless of the reasoning, the action was not good. It may not be evil, because you bear no malice towards the victim, but it was definitely not good. The argument applies even more to natural events. Recall this paraphrase from an american pastor after the floods in New Orleans: 'God let this happen because it allowed people to show their kindness...' The reasoning is akind to that of a besotted fool getting his friend to 'attack' a woman so that the fool could rescue her!

Questions, questions. How odd that what could have been a mechanism for the rich to control the poor (having absolute faith in a divine being that would provide a better afterlife, thus reducing the desire to improve the present) would have such a large effect beyond its intended purposes?

Personally I have no problems with religion-- as long as it keeps its nose out of real life. Inspirational stories, inspirational songs and group identity are all good things if they didn't come along with faith, hidden agendas, and an all so human quest for power on this earth. Maybe religion isn't so divinely inspired afterall. Till the next rant,

Edwin

Havent

2007-01-30T04:28:00.000+08:00

been posting here much.. somehow dun really have the urge. hahaha. guess u can see that that is good news. been planning for holidays.. looks like its really gonna cost. valentines day coming up soon.

Prayer...

2007-01-13T07:30:00.000+08:00

is not required because God has already set his divine plan?

Religion...

2007-01-13T07:18:00.000+08:00

is the bureaucracy between man and God ---Bill Maher

Disillusioned with the Bible

2006-12-31T07:30:00.000+08:00

Back from france! Very expensive trip (800 pounds at last count) but i must say i learnt alot from this journey. This is probably going to be my longest post, so forgive me for being disorganised.

Firstly, sorry to all those i wanted to buy souvenirs for but could not due to the tiny personal banker in my head. This is entirely my fault of course, and due to the costs of travelling, which went wayyyy up due to: cancelled flight due to the fog requiring an additional 224 pounds eurostar ticket and 1st class eurail tickets which were entirely uncalled for. Shows what happens when you put your travel plans in the hands of others.

I learnt alot about living with other people during the trip, and much thanks to jinfeng who was much tolerable and also made me learn some tolerance =P

Sorry again to all those in France, I admit, I brought the british fog over. Zhiheng, my friend, keeps quipping about how this was the worst fog France had had for a long time and how it was probably due to us brits who brought it over. hehehe. you couldnt see paris from the top of the eiffel tower!

France is great! I think most people disparage the french too much. They are extremely friendly once you try to at least speak abit of french and they are really quite helpful. On the other hand they have an unhealthy obsession with dogs leading to loads of dog shit in the streets. The drunk also are quite relaxed about pissing in the metro stations and on the streets, even moreso than the british. People say the best time to visit France is in summer, but the people who say that probably have no sense of smell. Of course, being in France, we ate lots of.... chicken. Why chicken? Well thats the national animal of france! If anyone needs a recommendation, Chickenspot at Chateau D'Eau, Paris, is the best, beating those in Marseille and Lyon (we didnt find ANY at Lyon.) Probabaly explains their military history. Speaking of which, the French really really like military wear. Much more fatigues and boots worn as casual wear as I've ever seen outside of a military base. I mean, if you cant beat them, dress like them??? The French also like to go home very early, just like the British, so we had lots of time at night to talk and read and I polished off 3 very good books, in order of ranking,
1)The God Delusion, Richard Dawkin (crystallising what I had been thinking for a rather long time, hence the title of this thread)
2)The World is Flat, Thomas Friedman
3)China Shakes the World, James Kynge

The first is for all christians, people thinking about converting, and religious people in general. More on this if I feel like typing another long post or if concerned people ask.
The second and the third is especially for all those who think that life is gonna be easy after school and for those who think that certain policies by the powers that be are misguided. Do go read them!

Lessons Learnt from the Trip:
1)Do not wash your hands off holiday planning. Find out what is going on.
2)Be ready for changes. Frustrating, Expensive changes. Learn to shrug them off and enjoy your trip anyway.
3)The ALICE pack offers alot of space and is rugged and durable and very very comfortable and the space between your back and the bag holds lots of useful stuff like water bottles and tubes of pringles, but... it has a very large side cross sectional area so that you feel the slightest wind, you cant really partition it or arrange your stuff, it is very wide so it doesnt fit into overhead bins, and you cant really attach stuff to the outside of it. Gonna have to hunt for another backpack i think.
4)Pack your stuff neatly. Putting in a little effort each time makes it much easier to unpack when you finally get back. Try on 15 minutes to dekit while checking your mail at the same time ;)
5)Bring a computer along because wireless is global and you really do get withdrawal symptoms.
6)Bring a photo of your loved one(s) along because it really helps to have their photo in your wallet when you miss them. Yes this means YOU. =P

More to follow if I feel like it.

Lost...

2006-12-20T07:46:00.000+08:00

my grandfather.

Sometimes when you're down the world just wants to kick your ass again.

Lost...

2006-12-19T01:11:00.000+08:00

my keys and my thumbdrive. and yoda. and just when u think things can't get any worse...

reading blogs can be...

2006-12-14T21:45:00.000+08:00

depressing.

i am afraid...

2006-12-08T07:03:00.000+08:00

...that the tone of my blog is gonna be like the colour of my blog... thus, no news is good news . somehow there's no need to blog when im happy.

this is the postings of someone with security considerations

2006-11-30T20:27:00.000+08:00

life is full of ups and downs

2006-11-29T06:58:00.000+08:00

this is the downs.

1 down, many many more to go!

2006-11-22T03:56:00.000+08:00

I Love You

just got back...

2006-11-20T16:26:00.000+08:00

I'm back from milan! OK place... not very many sights...its really a place for the richer people to shop!! I didnt spend alot there... trying to save for my trip in december... but there was still a nice castle (Castello Sforenzo) and Duomo Cathedral. I guess the most exciting part of the trip was the flight back... during the landing we hit turbulence and the plane was yawing from side to side as we landed...causing it to swerve on the runway!

and its time for school now. if u wanna find out whether i had to climb out of a shattered wreck of a place... read the next entry. heh.

XC Results

2006-10-27T15:12:00.000+08:00

Belsize Park Run (8 km): 0:37:21
hope i can do better next time

Jogging is very beneficial. It's good for your legs and your feet. It's also very good for the ground. It makes it feel needed. ~Charles Schulz, Peanuts

Long time no see...

2006-10-27T14:42:00.000+08:00

Looks like the sun is getting more rare over here in london and the rains are coming... luckily my waterproof shoes just came today! shall take a picture of it when i collect it from security at weeks hall. grr.. still trying to find someone to buy my malice pack from the US!! kae thats all for the past two weeks... as u can see im not a great writer. =P

Phantom of the Opera

2006-10-18T07:04:00.000+08:00

Havent had much time to post here, so i'll just leave this link for all to think about =)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-pbSkfPNFQ

Keep an open mind, good night!

tired

2006-10-14T09:07:00.000+08:00

this is the second night im sleeping so late... well its late for me since im not a night owl like some people... went to some formal dinner, and it was like the first time I saw so many people wearing bow ties... the weirdest thing was how the other students partied in their formal wear to, of all things, retro....prolly the worst form of mambo night the world has ever seen since half the people were drunk...

Day 261

2006-10-09T15:29:00.000+08:00

Just changed the layout of my blog by changing the code directly...kinda slow work... so if my blog looks messy now please tell me and how i can change it yea?

Day 262

2006-10-09T01:03:00.000+08:00

back from chinatown... just bought an addidas jacket to keep me warm...not that I dont already have tons of jackets =P bought other essentials like oyster sauce and all that crap for chinese cooking as well... the british really massacre chinese food.. haha.. well the hall is quiet now cuz most of the locals went home for the weekend, but im going over to cook with some singaporeans.. and heres ur british slang lesson for today:

How to sound like a local 101:
"quid"= dollar
usage: The soccer boots i bought cost twenty quid!

till next time...

Day 263

2006-10-07T15:29:00.000+08:00

hi world! kinda weird to start blogging again after so long... but heck it. for the first post im too lazy to do anything much so heres a quote and a link to a rather cool site for all runners who run in asics shoes... 2007 Spring Summer collection

"Please. I'd thought you above such abysmal Judeo-Christian fallacies. 'The serpent is not to be trusted.' 'Knowledge is the source of all evil.' Why do you think parents instill such beliefs in their children--or that your sire reared you in like fashion? Why would they balk at sharing wisdom? Ah. You begin to understand." ---Vampire the Masquerade

http://forums.runnersworld.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=964101347&amp;f=687106477&m=6891008611&r=6891008611#6891008611