What are we to make of the "furore" surrounding the publishing of anti-Islam cartoons by Dutch and French daily papers? The intent seems clear enough - to portray Islam, and therefore all Muslims as fanatic terrorists, and to provoke Muslim groups to confirm for the world that this portrayal is accurate - which is exactly what has happened. Flag and effigy burning has already ensued in Pakistan, Indonesia, and the Palestine territories. In Iran, hundreds of thousands of worshipers staged a protest demonstration against the insulting cartoons, shouting "Death to America," "Death to Israel" and "this insult will not remain unanswered."

The other day a most interesting post was made to our modest little guestbook/forum as follows:

First of all, congratulations on your site - your work is admirable. Lately I have found on it one more piece of a puzzle I have been trying to put together for years.

The basic question goes like this: why does it seem necessary for the powers of the week to put down women to such an extent? An urgent sub-question is: why is George W. Bush so hellbent on taking away not only women's rights generally, especially reproductive rights?

Now, we already know some of the rather self-evident answers: a state oriented towards war and domination NEEDS babies, most of all babies born from poor and uneducated families, in order to have a) people willing to enlist in the army and b) cheap wage workers - it will be very important to have a lot of them when comes the time to remove unions and worker's rights. And you cannot get a high birth rate in a society where women are free to choose not to have babies. But then, that explanation is not enough.

Today, Oil company Royal Dutch Shell reported a record annual profit for a UK-listed company of $22.94bn. This comes on top of similarly outrageous profits previously posted by other major oil exploration companies. Exxon Mobil for example made a staggering $36.1 billion in 2005. Where do these vast sums of money come from? Check your bank balance, that might give you a clue.

Lately, I find myself in a bit of a funk. It all started with Patrick Fitzgerald riding in on his white horse and dishing out indictments left and right - at least, that's what everyone thought he would do. But that's not what happened.

There has also been a lot of talk lately about impeaching Bush and the rest of the corrupt gang in Washington. Given the rate at which things are progressing in the US at the moment, however, I suspect that in the not too distant future, I may be concluding my thoughts on the impeachment idea with another "But that's not what happened".

The question I keep turning over in my head is this: is it that not enough Americans can see what is going on in the US of A, or is it that enough Americans see, but aren't doing enough?

It is easy to see how the former could well be true. American society has always been one of ideals and saviors. The reality of the situation never mattered as much as the fact that one was working toward that ideal job or ideal moral plateau. Nowhere is this more evident than in the extreme religion that the Bush gang uses to garner support in its battle against a different "extreme" religion. Indeed, we might notice that "extremism" is the word of the decade. While many Americans seek saviors to preserve their way of life, the Bush gang warns of "dangerous extremists" - you know: "the Devil himself is at work here!" It's the black and white view that is so loved by the psychopaths in power, and it is one that has unfortunately been adopted by the masses. As long as the people believe they have a little slice of heaven, they won't want to rock the boat too much. It's all or nothing. While many citizens are pleasantly distracted by this little game, the government gets away with whatever it wants. Americans are on a "need to know" basis, and the Bush gang has decided America doesn't need to know a thing.

While browsing the news websites recently, I noticed an advertisement for an upcoming movie about Flight 93 that 'crashed' in the Pennsylvania countryside on September 11th 2001.

Here's the ad:

©Unknown

It's a dirty job, but we have to do it.

The Senate vote confirming Alito to the Supreme Court shows that those in power know that the outcome is fixed, and that if they wish to share in the power of the new tyranny, they will have to play ball.

So, what next?

There is only one possible meaning of the Senate's cloture vote on Samuel Alito's confirmation. 75% of our senators, and all of our other elected officials, KNOW that this country's elections are rigged, and that the will and voice of the people no longer matter. They KNOW that so long as they "play ball" with the dictates of the new totalitarian government, which will now ensue beyond all previously imagined levels to commit domestic terrorism of the populace and destruction of infrastructure, environment and all else, THEY will have their power, privilege and prestige assured to them regardless. They will keep their positions and all the perquisites thereof in return for providing the appearance of a democracy and of an "opposing" party. That is their sole function now, to deceive both average Americans and especially the other nations of the world, and to discourage, divert and drain away the public's efforts to seek justice and the restoration of our rights. And a few other niceties like luring any effective dissidents out to be identified and corralled later.

That is the real deal, and anyone with two neurons firing now knows a big part of the solution. They've stolen our elections, and it is up to the brightest and best of our patriotic and computer savvy people to steal them back. Every dissident needs to "see the light" and immediately get actively, personally involved in local elections. Wherever there is computerized or mechanical, black box vote scamming machinery in use, we must figure out how to access it and either hack it and stack it or else kill it so it cannot be used again, ever.

Oprah calls out a liar on corporate TV. Could it be her flames were meant for someone else?

The headlines of the corporate media in the US have been full of stories of another liar in recent days. The man's name is James Frey and his lies were contained in a book that he claimed was based on his life. Oprah Winfrey gave the book a recommendation, and that's when things went south. It came out that Mr. Frey had stretched the truth a bit in recounting some of the events in his past. He'd lied.

Well, poor Oprah went ballistic, and she called Mr. Frey back onto her show to give him a piece of her mind. She felt duped, and she had he courage to call out Mr. Frey on her show, an act so courageous that the pundits made certain it became headline material...for some book that will be forgotten in a year. Simply because he made her look bad. Poor Oprah's ego couldn't take it, and she had to set the record straight.

Gold closed at 558.90 dollars an ounce on Friday, up 0.9% from $553.80 at the previous week's close. The dollar closed at 0.8269 euros on Friday, up 0.3% from 0.8241 euros the week before. The euro, then, closed at 1.2094 dollars, compared to 1.2134 at the previous Friday's close. Gold in euros, then, would be 462.13 euros an ounce, up 1.3% from 456.40 the week before. Oil closed at 67.76 dollars a barrel, down 1.1% from $68.48 a barrel the Friday before. Oil in euros would be 56.03 down 0.7% from 56.44 euros a barrel the week before. The gold/oil ratio closed at 8.25 barrels of oil per ounce of gold, up 2.0% from 8.09 at the previous week's end. In the U.S. stock market, the Dow closed at 10,907.21 on Friday, up 2.2% from 10,667.39 the week before. The NASDAQ closed at 2,304.23 for the week, up 1.5% from 2,247.70. The yield on the ten-year U.S. Treasury note ended at 4.51%, up 16 basis points from 4.35 at the close of the previous week.

Gold continued its rise last week and the U.S. stock market rallied on Friday, regaining much of what it lost the previous Friday. Oil eased a bit as well.

What did you do today? What are your plans for tomorrow? Normal stuff? Go to work? Pick up the kids? Preparing dinner? Maybe a drink in the bar with some friends, or stay at home with the latest blockbuster movie? If so, then you are doing pretty much the same thing as billions of other people around the world, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Life goes on after all. Or does it? I mean, will normal life go on indefinitely? You see, I was checking the news today and… well, "oh boy" is the best way I can describe it.

If the world is a mirror of those who inhabit it, what can the issue of climate change tell us about ourselves?

Everybody talks about the weather. It is the one safe topic when you meet a stranger or are stuck next to a colleague you don't know very well waiting for a meeting. If you live in a rural area, the weather has a direct affect on people's lives as a year's crops depend upon how much or little rain may fall, an incident of hail that wipes out young fruit, or how early or late a frost may come. If you are in a city, with only your weekends off, then whether or not your free days are rainy or sunny can assume a grand importance.

In short, everyone has something to say about the weather.

There is a lot of talk these days about climate change and global warming. We hear predictions of everything from the melting of the ice caps leading to a rise of the ocean level enough to flood New York City and other low-lying areas, to a sudden change in the Gulf Stream that would usher in a new ice age, to complete silence. Some give timelines of a thousand years' transition. Others tell us it could happen much more rapidly in two to five. Some say it isn't going to happen at all.

The Bush administration continues to insist there is not enough scientific data in hand while the "Peak Oil" apologists use climate change as another argument in favour of massive population reduction and the end to an oil-based economy.