February 2008

The New York Philharmonic, conducted by maestro Lorin Maazel, performed a historic concert in the North Korean capital city of Pyongyang. They earned a five-minute standing ovation from the audience with their third and final encore, the playing of the Korean folksong, “Arirang” (a song of love and loss).

Of the diplomatic impact of the concert, Maazel feels, “The groundwork has been laid” and “there may be a mission accomplished here.” He says he interpreted the audience as saying, “We understand the gesture of coming here. It could not have been easy for you. We appreciate that you did.”

(I’m not so sure about that)

Asked why President Kim Jong Il didn’t attend the concert, North Korea’s Minister of Culture, Kang Nung Su, stated, “Our general is very busy leading the revolution of Korea” and “There is no significance at all” to his absence.

Leading the revolution? On the street of Pyongyang, a billboard stands as a stark reminder of exactly whom the North Korean government is revolting against. Denouncing the United States the billboard reads: “Those who tackle (hurt) our pride, Wherever you are, We will put an end to it.”

Pakistan held their parliamentary elections and the people have spoken–they’re not happy the Musharraf government. With the vote-counting nearly complete, the two main opposition parties have secured 154 of the 268 contested seats with Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party leading with 86; the pro-Musharraf party trails with only 39 seats. It’ll be interesting to see if Musharraf resigns as he said would if he lost the support of the Pakistani people.

(doubtful)

Since no one party attained the two-thirds majority necessary to take action against the sitting president, the opposition groups led by the PPP will likely form a partnership force Musharraf to step down or face impeachment.

The election also dealt a serious blow to the pro-Taliban Jamiat-e-Ulema party who won only three seats. Also, a coalition of Islamist religious parties, the United Action Forum, are projected to lose control of the North West Frontier Province, winning only 9 of 96 contested seats.

MORE: Hot Air

Kosovo declared its independence from Serbia today and now stands as the world’s newest country. Administered since 1999 by the United Nations, the new nation is banking on US and EU support to bolster its failing economy; the US and EU are expected to grant diplomatic recognition of the new state.

Kosovo is also hoping the US and EU recognition will prevent the escalation of hostilities between the new state and rivals Serbia and Russia, who are not the least bit happy about the current situation. Russia considers Kosovo’s move for independence to be a provocation that may entice similar action from the former Soviet Union’s southern rim minorities. Serbia isn’t recognizing Kosovo independence, referring to it as “a false state.” Russia stands solidly behind Serbia in condemning Kosovo’s secession and is whining to the UN Security Council.

Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci, “Kosovo is proud, independent, sovereign and free” and parliament speaker Jakup Krasniqi said, “Kosovo is a republic — an independent, democratic and sovereign state”. However, I think it’s important to note, and no one is mentioning this in any of the news reports, the new nation of Kosovo is primarily Muslim. Remember, Islam will accept no government other than Islam and I predict that any attempt at democracy in Kosovo will be short-lived.

::: MORE :::

Hot Air is the first report I’ve found considering the potential role of Islam in the new independent Kosovo.

ComingAnarchy reports with photos of a Kosavar independence celebration in Stuttgart.

Webloggin also observes that the majority of ethic Albanians in Kosovo are Muslim and that Kosovo’s prime minister, the former rebel leader of the Kosovo Liberation Army, is reported to have ties to Osama Bin Laden.

In his five-hour Senate testimony today, Yankee pitcher and seven-time Cy Young award winner, Roger Clemens, denied under oath that he ever used steroids or human growth hormone (HGH). This, of course, contradicts the sworn testimony of Clemen’s former trainer, Brian McNamee, who says he did. So, one of them is lying and has perjured himself before the U.S. Senate. But who? I pretty much think both men are sleazy and therefore, equally capable of lying: McNamee comes off as a snake oil salesman; while Clemens is a dirty politician who spent the past week lobbying congressmen (passing out signed baseballs, no doubt).

However, in light of the deposition provided by Clemens’ longtime friend and teammate, Andy Pettitte, I believe the Yankee pitcher is lying. Evidently, Pettitte’s testimony corroborates McNamee’s story and what’s more, Pettitte is believable! (Pettitte has already admitted to using HGH and has nothing to gain by lying). Of his friend’s testimony, Clemens said Pettitte must have “misremembered”.

It’s sad when a player in the twilight of his career has to resort to performance-enhancing drugs to eke out a couple more years.

There’s certainly no joy in Mudville today.

Finally, the United States will seek justice for the 9/11 attacks! The Pentagon has charged six Guantanamo detainees with murder and war crimes in connection with the 9/11 terror attacks. Among the six is Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the attacks.

The military is recommending the six be tried together before a military tribunal recommend that the six men be tried together before a military tribunal. This would afford the detainees with the same rights given U.S. service members tries under the military justice system. However, there’s concern that the case may be clouded due to recent revelations that Mr. Mohammed was waterboarded. Of course, this will be something the military judge will have to consider. It will be up to him to determine what evidence is allowed.

Previously, the Bush administration shied away from public trials of suspected terrorists; instead, interrogating them in secret in the hope of staving-off future attacks. However, only resulted in fear and distrust of the U.S., both domestically and abroad. And if that wasn’t enough, the trial procedures first issued by the Bush administration significantly deviated from current military law, such as excluding the defendant from his own trial, allowing the introduction of any “probative” evidence, including statements made under torture, and forbidding the defendant to appeal to an independent court. Naturally, this didn’t bode well for the President and the Supreme Court shut him down.

Now, the tribunal will unfold in a specially designed courtroom at Guantanamo, within a tent city called “Camp Justice”. The camp will house the prosecution, defense lawyers, journalists and others. Survivors and relatives of 9/11 victims will be invited to watch the trial through closed-circuit broadcasts in the U.S. However, according to officials, wider public access is unlikely.

This is no time for secrets! Censor the testimony if you must, but air the trial on CSPAN!

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said twice yesterday that Iraq “is a failure,” and the President’s troop surge has “not produced the desired effect.” Pelosi argued that

“[t]he purpose of the surge was to create a secure time for the government of Iraq to make the political change to bring reconciliation to Iraq”… “They have not done that.”

and yet Pelosi concedes,

The troops have succeeded, God bless them.

(sounds like someone is trying to have her cake and eat it, too!)

These words from Pelosi after a letter from Abu-Tariq, emir of the al-Layin and al-Mashahdah sector, an al-Qaeda leader in Anbar province, reports that Iraq faces an “extraordinary crisis”. Abu-Tariq says last year’s mass defection of ordinary Sunnis from al-Qaeda to the US military “created panic, fear and the unwillingness to fight” and al-Qaeda’s security structure suffered “total collapse”. He goes on to describe that his force, once 600-strong, has shrunk to 20.

Abu-Tariq also blames the local community:

We were mistreated, cheated and betrayed by some of our brothers…Those people were nothing but hypocrites, liars and traitors and were waiting for the right moment to switch sides with whoever pays them most.

as well as al-Qaeda itself, referencing their brutal tactics:

“We helped them to unite against us…The Americans and the apostates launched their campaigns against us and we found ourselves in a circle not being able to move, organize or conduct our operations.”

Seems to me when your enemies are making statements like these, you just may be winning!

What Pelosi and the dhimmi-crats are trying to do is separate themselves from the new direction Bush has taken in Iraq, but they don’t want to sound like defeatists in light of the Iraq’s improved stability. This is the only way they’re going to win on National Security in November.

Pelosi is playing political games and although she doesn’t want to sound like a “naysayer”, she is certainly coming off as one. Ms Pelosi has joined her Senate brother, Harry Reid, with some “This War is Lost” comments of her own.

In mid-January, Scotland Yard, who was called in by Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf to investigate the murder of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, concluded that Ms Bhutto was not shot, but died from head trauma. They also reported that the supposed government cover-up was nothing more than shoddy police work. So, it should come as no big surprise that Bhutto’s supporters are rejecting the Yard’s findings.

(and with good reason!)

According to Scotland Yard’s report:

“The only tenable cause of her rapidly fatal head injury in this case is that it occurred as the result of impact due to the effect of the bomb blast.”

While Scotland Yard contends their “primary focus…was to assist the Pakistani authorities in establishing the cause and circumstances of Ms Bhutto’s death.” They readily admit that,

“The task of establishing exactly what happened was complicated by the lack of an extended and detailed search of the crime scene, the absence of an autopsy, and the absence of recognised [sic] body recovery and victim identification processes.”

Yah think? So, how did they arrive at their conclusion? According to the report
“Considerable reliance [was] placed upon the X-rays taken at Rawalpindi General Hospital following Ms Bhutto’s death.” Accordingly, the examination revealed,

“Ms Bhutto’s only apparent injury was a major trauma to the right side of the head. The UK experts all exclude this injury being an entry or exit wound as a result of gunshot. The only X-ray records, taken after her death, were of Ms Bhutto’s head. However, the possibility of a bullet wound to her mid or lower trunk can reasonably be excluded. This is based upon the protection afforded by the armoured [sic] vehicle in which she was travelling [sic] at the time of the attack, and the accounts of her family and hospital staff who examined her.

However, the Yard’s pathologist admits that he is

“unable categorically to exclude the possibility of there being a gunshot wound to the upper trunk or neck” [but] “the available evidence suggests that there was no gunshot injury.”

So, without actually seeing the body and with only x-rays of Bhutto’s head, Scotland Yard has determined that she was killed by a bump to her head; the result of a bomb blast perpetrated by a suicide bomber.

This simply doesn’t jive with eyewitness accounts and video footage. This information, gathered independently from Pakistan, left few doubts that Ms. Bhutto was shot by one or more assailants. According to a U.S. administration official working in Pakistan, “There is a consensus emerging that she must have been shot.”

It appears this investigation solved nothing; the country is still divided.

As for Scotland Yard’s investigative skill: I suppose if I was asked to determine the cause of a car crash, and all I was given to examine was a flat tire, I’d determine the cause of the crash was a blow-out.

Laughing, clapping hands
Happy squealing squeaky shrill
Granddaughter at play

President Bush unveiled his FY 2009 budget request today. If enacted, the $3.1 trillion dollar plan would increase the federal deficit beyond $400 billion (up from $162 billion in 2007!). The Bush plan seeks to boost defense, while cutting more than 150 discretionary programs. Since the purpose of government is defending the homeland and not acting as society’s nursemaid, I agree with the budget in principle. However, I just can’t support sinking the United States further into debt. It just doesn’t make sense.

The president claims his proposal will balance the federal budget by 2012. What kind of math is that? A 162% deficit increase will ultimately result in a balanced budget?!? I know sometimes one must spend money to make money, but WTF? I’d love to see the formula that makes that work!

Fortunately, when FY 2009 rolls around on October 1st of this year, Congress will probably pass a continuing resolution to fund the government at current levels until the new president takes office. Hopefully, clearer heads will prevail and Congress will pass a more fiscally responsible budget.

(wishful thinking)

Is information meant to be free? That is the question that plagues the masses in this Internet age. There is really no legal debate regarding ownership, it is quite obvious the developer actually owns the intellectual property. This ownership gives him or her the right to hide the source code of the software from the prying eyes of outside developers. The real debate is one of utility. Where is the greatest benefit derived: hiding the code or sharing it?

In 1998, Lego Company introduced the Mindstorms Robotic Invention Systems. This toy allowed users to build and program working robots using a simple computer interface. However, soon after its release, Lego enthusiasts hacked the system’s proprietary source code and posted their discovery on the web for all to see and use. Others built onto the hacked code to improve and enhance Mindstorms software, increasing the utility of the product. Though illegal, this was a boon for Lego because the hackers antics actually fueled sales of the toy; in the first year, Mindstorms would exceed sales projections by over 800 percent. Considering the outcome of the hackers illegal act, did they do anything wrong?

Lego didn’t intend to release Mindstorms source code, so there is no arguing with the fact that the hackers actions were tantamount to stealing, and constituted a criminal act. However, it is quite possible that Mindstorms would not have experienced the level of success it achieved without the help of the hackers as outside developers. This begs the question, what is the value of proprietary software?

Microsoft is the leader of the proprietary software establishment, arguing that unless a company protects it’s intellectual property, it will be stolen. Subsequently, investors will not get a return on their investment and no one will invest in future innovation. Microsoft’s main argument in support of proprietary software is that total cost of ownership is lower using their software than the non-proprietary, open source, alternatives. Microsoft also claims superiority in reliability, security, performance and interoperability, but are these arguments relevant? Certainly they are, but are they substantial?

I believe the answer is unequivocally, no. The problem with proprietary software is that the user never truly knows how good or bad the software is. The manufacturer hides the source code behind binaries so no one can get to them. This centralized management approach will not allow the user to adapt the software into a more useful form. Open source software, on the other hand, takes a decentralized management approach and “harnesses the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process”. As well as promising an end to predatory vendor lock-in, the open source initiative touts better quality software that costs less, and is more reliable and flexible than its proprietary counterparts. So, is open source the way to go?

Open source programs significantly increase innovation and utility in the Internet age. Eric S. Maskin, a professor at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey, and winner of the 2006 Nobel Prize in Economics, has done significant research in the area of software patents. He determined that innovations in the software market were achieved as a series of sequential steps, where each innovation was built on the work of predecessors. Since each innovator followed a different path to attain the same goal, software patents tended to stifle innovation. The bottom line, as Metcalf’s Law suggests, is that the more attention and software code a company has from outside developers, the greater the utility of the overall product line or brand.

Businesses have the right to protect their intellectual property through software patents and licensing. However, Lego’s Mindstorms experience should serve notice to these proprietary companies that the value of their product is not contained within its secrets. True innovation and ultimately consumer benefit will come at the hands of the users themselves. Like Lego Company, when business expose their code to the open source network of developers, the skies the limit.