Thursday, February 5, 2015


News Clips For The Day


http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0115-zuckerman-secular-parenting-20150115-story.html#page=1

Op-Ed 
How secular family values stack up
By PHIL ZUCKERMAN
January 14, 2015

For secular people, morality is predicated on one simple principle: empathetic reciprocity, widely known as the Golden Rule. (Los Angeles Times)

A growing American demographic: Children raised without religion, with moral values soundly intact

The growing number of children raised without any religion may turn out to be a good thing

Children in America's secular families turn out just fine

More children are “growing up godless” than at any other time in our nation's history. They are the offspring of an expanding secular population that includes a relatively new and burgeoning category of Americans called the “Nones,” so nicknamed because they identified themselves as believing in “nothing in particular” in a 2012 study by the Pew Research Center.

The number of American children raised without religion has grown significantly since the 1950s, when fewer than 4% of Americans reported growing up in a nonreligious household, according to several recent national studies. That figure entered the double digits when a 2012 study showed that 11% of people born after 1970 said they had been raised in secular homes. This may help explain why 23% of adults in the U.S. claim to have no religion, and more than 30% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 say the same.

So how does the raising of upstanding, moral children work without prayers at mealtimes and morality lessons at Sunday school? Quite well, it seems.

Far from being dysfunctional, nihilistic and rudderless without the security and rectitude of religion, secular households provide a sound and solid foundation for children, according to Vern Bengston, a USC professor of gerontology and sociology.

For nearly 40 years, Bengston has overseen the Longitudinal Study of Generations, which has become the largest study of religion and family life conducted across several generational cohorts in the United States. When Bengston noticed the growth of nonreligious Americans becoming increasingly pronounced, he decided in 2013 to add secular families to his study in an attempt to understand how family life and intergenerational influences play out among the religionless.

He was surprised by what he found: High levels of family solidarity and emotional closeness between parents and nonreligious youth, and strong ethical standards and moral values that had been clearly articulated as they were imparted to the next generation.

“Many nonreligious parents were more coherent and passionate about their ethical principles than some of the ‘religious' parents in our study,” Bengston told me. “The vast majority appeared to live goal-filled lives characterized by moral direction and sense of life having a purpose.”

My own ongoing research among secular Americans — as well as that of a handful of other social scientists who have only recently turned their gaze on secular culture — confirms that nonreligious family life is replete with its own sustaining moral values and enriching ethical precepts. Chief among those: rational problem solving, personal autonomy, independence of thought, avoidance of corporal punishment, a spirit of “questioning everything” and, far above all, empathy.

For secular people, morality is predicated on one simple principle: empathetic reciprocity, widely known as the Golden Rule. Treating other people as you would like to be treated. It is an ancient, universal ethical imperative. And it requires no supernatural beliefs. As one atheist mom who wanted to be identified only as Debbie told me: “The way we teach them what is right and what is wrong is by trying to instill a sense of empathy ... how other people feel. You know, just trying to give them that sense of what it's like to be on the other end of their actions. And I don't see any need for God in that.

“If your morality is all tied in with God,” she continued, “what if you at some point start to question the existence of God? Does that mean your moral sense suddenly crumbles? The way we are teaching our children … no matter what they choose to believe later in life, even if they become religious or whatever, they are still going to have that system.”

The results of such secular child-rearing are encouraging. Studies have found that secular teenagers are far less likely to care what the “cool kids” think, or express a need to fit in with them, than their religious peers. When these teens mature into “godless” adults, they exhibit less racism than their religious counterparts, according to a 2010 Duke University study. Many psychological studies show that secular grownups tend to be less vengeful, less nationalistic, less militaristic, less authoritarian and more tolerant, on average, than religious adults.

Recent research also has shown that children raised without religion tend to remain irreligious as they grow older — and are perhaps more accepting. Secular adults are more likely to understand and accept the science concerning global warming, and to support women's equality and gay rights. One telling fact from the criminology field: Atheists were almost absent from our prison population as of the late 1990s, comprising less than half of 1% of those behind bars, according to Federal Bureau of Prisons statistics. This echoes what the criminology field has documented for more than a century — the unaffiliated and the nonreligious engage in far fewer crimes.

Another meaningful related fact: Democratic countries with the lowest levels of religious faith and participation today — such as Sweden, Denmark, Japan, Belgium and New Zealand — have among the lowest violent crime rates in the world and enjoy remarkably high levels of societal well-being. If secular people couldn't raise well-functioning, moral children, then a preponderance of them in a given society would spell societal disaster. Yet quite the opposite is the case.

Being a secular parent and something of an expert on secular culture, I know well the angst many secular Americans experience when they can't help but wonder: Could I possibly be making a mistake by raising my children without religion? The unequivocal answer is no. Children raised without religion have no shortage of positive traits and virtues, and they ought to be warmly welcomed as a growing American demographic.

Phil Zuckerman is a professor of sociology and secular studies at Pitzer College and author of "Living the Secular Life: New Answers to Old Questions."




“For secular people, morality is predicated on one simple principle: empathetic reciprocity, widely known as the Golden Rule. (Los Angeles Times) A growing American demographic: Children raised without religion, with moral values soundly intact. The growing number of children raised without any religion may turn out to be a good thing.... They are the offspring of an expanding secular population that includes a relatively new and burgeoning category of Americans called the “Nones,” so nicknamed because they identified themselves as believing in “nothing in particular” in a 2012 study by the Pew Research Center.... That figure entered the double digits when a 2012 study showed that 11% of people born after 1970 said they had been raised in secular homes. This may help explain why 23% of adults in the U.S. claim to have no religion, and more than 30% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 say the same. So how does the raising of upstanding, moral children work without prayers at mealtimes and morality lessons at Sunday school? Quite well, it seems.... Vern Bengston, a USC professor of gerontology and sociology. For nearly 40 years, Bengston has overseen the Longitudinal Study of Generations, which has become the largest study of religion and family life conducted across several generational cohorts in the United States. When Bengston noticed the growth of nonreligious Americans becoming increasingly pronounced, he decided in 2013 to add secular families to his study in an attempt to understand how family life and intergenerational influences play out among the religionless.... “Many nonreligious parents were more coherent and passionate about their ethical principles than some of the ‘religious' parents in our study,” Bengston told me. “The vast majority appeared to live goal-filled lives characterized by moral direction and sense of life having a purpose.”... confirms that nonreligious family life is replete with its own sustaining moral values and enriching ethical precepts. Chief among those: rational problem solving, personal autonomy, independence of thought, avoidance of corporal punishment, a spirit of “questioning everything” and, far above all, empathy.... Democratic countries with the lowest levels of religious faith and participation today — such as Sweden, Denmark, Japan, Belgium and New Zealand — have among the lowest violent crime rates in the world and enjoy remarkably high levels of societal well-being.”

My parents, while they both went to church, didn't talk about the Judgment Day, the rising of Jesus from death, and the fear of hell. We did have frequent discussions on important issues and life experiences around the dinner table. Likewise, we went to a moderately liberal church, the United Methodists. I went to talk to my minister at the age of 12 when I was due to join the church as an adult member. I told him that I just didn't believe the miracle aspects of Christianity, such as the virgin birth and the creation of the universe and the human race at the spoken word of God. I also didn't firmly believe in heaven and hell. Basically I believe what I can prove to myself with my senses and with logical thought, and I believe scientific discovery.

I do believe in Jesus as a teacher and founder of the Christian religion, but not his rising from the dead. My minister told me not to worry about it, and go ahead and join the church. I stopped going to church when I went to college. As I got older I joined AA (for the same reason everybody joins) and began to pray frequently as a part of the program. AA fosters spiritual values and contemplation, but not any specific religion. Many AA members are Jewish and others are agnostic like myself and the founders of the AA program decided in the beginning to avoid specific religious indoctrination of any kind. I found that the practice of prayer and meditation calmed me and made me feel that the God of my early childhood was a real entity and could indeed understand my prayers. My basic moral and social values were aroused again through AA, and I finally found the Unitarian Universalist Church while I was living in Washington, DC. I was also drawn to a group called Unity, which is very similar. Unitarianism and Universalism merged in the 1950s to form the UU Church.

When it comes to my basic morality it is definitely liberal, especially on sexual matters. I do believe in men and women feeling strong love rather than just enjoying a roll in the hay, but sometimes “the time is right,” and being sexually satisfied is a mentally healthy thing in my opinion. I don't believe in having a fling with married men, however. On the other moral issues I am more strict and doctrinaire – lying, cheating, stealing, driving drunk, bullying, and other common sins and crimes are not something I condone. I also have never done most of those things. That is from my home upbringing. I don't really relate to these young teens who run in gangs, steal in department stores for the simple fun of it, dress in sexy and inappropriate ways, cheat on tests, behave cruelly toward humans or animals, vandalize buildings and public monuments, etc. To me they are young criminals, and need 1) their day in court and 2) some medication and a good psychotherapist.

I can't overstate the value of hearing our intelligent and thought provoking ministers talk (very rarely about heaven and hell), going to Methodist Youth Fellowship, being in the Girl Scouts from Brownies to Senior Scouts and the Curved Bar rank. So basically, our church was an important social group for me and a guide toward living a simple Christian life. Perhaps even more importantly, my Church and Girls Scout friends were good kids – not gang members.

If I had had a totally non-religious background but gentle and thoughtful teaching on ethical and moral issues I think I would have turned out much the same way, but perhaps without the disillusionment of losing what religious faith I did have due to my tendency to think deeply on my own and read great fiction books, such as Jane Austen and War and Peace, while still in high school, and to a much greater degree in college. I developed a great belief in THOUGHT over FAITH in religious and social matters, and the involvement in important movements such as civil rights and women's rights to achieve good in society. I do believe I turned out better than I would have if I had been brought up a Southern Baptist, afraid of going to hell every minute and afraid to form any of my own opinions about anything. At this point I am totally at peace and capable of living a day at a time as AA teaches.






http://news.yahoo.com/dems-israeli-ambassador-earful-over-netanyahu-speech-172000377--politics.html

Dems give Israeli ambassador earful over Netanyahu speech
AP 
By DONNA CASSATA and CHARLES BABINGTON
February 4, 2015

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a sometimes heated meeting with Israel's ambassador to the U.S., several House Democrats expressed anger Wednesday over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's acceptance of a Republican invitation to address Congress next month.

Some of the seven lawmakers — all of whom are Jewish and strong supporters of Israel — urged the prime minister to postpone the speech or hold it somewhere other than Congress, participants said. They told Ambassador Ron Dermer that Netanyahu was unwise to accept a GOP invitation that bypassed President Barack Obama, and to schedule the speech only two weeks before Netanyahu seeks another term in Israel's elections.

The meeting's purpose was "to try to defuse the optics" of the planned speech to Congress, and to return to substantive issues involving the two nations, said Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., who hosted the gathering in his House office. Some attendees suggested a different time or venue for a Netanyahu speech, Israel told reporters, but "we have a while to go before we have to address whether or not he's coming."

Netanyahu's March 3 speech would focus largely on Iran — and its nuclear program — amid delicate negotiations involving the United States, other Western powers and Tehran. Netanyahu's acceptance of House Speaker John Boehner's invitation has infuriated the White House and many congressional Democrats.

Rep. Israel said the problem began when Boehner "decided that Israel would be a political football and he'd spike it in the end zone."

Dermer asked for the Wednesday meeting in hopes of defusing some of the tension, lawmakers said.

Several Jewish House Democrats had met last week during the party's retreat in Philadelphia to discuss what to do about the speech.

The meeting's purpose was "to try to defuse the optics" of the planned speech to Congress, and to return to substantive issues involving the two nations, said Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., who hosted the gathering in his House office. Some attendees suggested a different time or venue for a Netanyahu speech, Israel told reporters, but "we have a while to go before we have to address whether or not he's coming."
Other participants were Reps. Sander Levin of Michigan, Jerrold Nadler and Nita Lowey of New York, Ted Deutch of Florida, Jan Schakowsky of Illinois and Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, who also heads the Democratic National Committee.

Last Friday, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California was asked if Netanyahu would be well-advised to speak out in favor of heavier sanctions on Iran somewhere other than a joint meeting of Congress. She said "the opportunities are great" and noted that the Israeli leader often appears on Sunday talk shows in the U.S.

Some Democratic lawmakers — including Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, the Senate's second-ranking Democratic leader — say they've not decided whether they would attend Netanyahu's March 3 speech in the House chamber. Numerous top Democrats, however, dismiss the idea of a large-scale boycott.

Dermer's office said it had no comment on Wednesday's meeting.

Netanyahu has been an outspoken critic of the international efforts to negotiate a deal with Iran, which does not recognize the Jewish state, and which supports anti-Israeli militants like Lebanon's Hezbollah and Palestinian Hamas.

He is sensitive, though, to Israel's important relationship with the United States.

Last week, Netanyahu called Pelosi, Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, and New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate, in hopes of blunting their opposition to the invitation from Boehner, R-Ohio.

The issue has split many U.S. Jewish organizations and communities, with some liberal groups criticizing the planned speech and others cheering it.

March 3 is 21 days before the U.S. and its international partners are supposed to have reached a framework agreement with Iran — one that would provide an outline for a more comprehensive deal set to be finalized by the end of June.

The U.S. and its allies want to prevent Iran from having the capability to develop a nuclear weapon. Iran denies any interest in nuclear weapons and says its program is for peaceful uses such as nuclear power and medical technology.

Boehner says the House is an equal branch of government and has the right to invite the Israeli leader to "talk to the members of Congress about the serious threat that Iran poses and the serious threat of radical Islam."




“The meeting's purpose was "to try to defuse the optics" of the planned speech to Congress, and to return to substantive issues involving the two nations, said Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., who hosted the gathering in his House office. Some attendees suggested a different time or venue for a Netanyahu speech, Israel told reporters, but "we have a while to go before we have to address whether or not he's coming."...The meeting's purpose was "to try to defuse the optics" of the planned speech to Congress, and to return to substantive issues involving the two nations, said Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., who hosted the gathering in his House office. Some attendees suggested a different time or venue for a Netanyahu speech, Israel told reporters, but "we have a while to go before we have to address whether or not he's coming."... Last Friday, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California was asked if Netanyahu would be well-advised to speak out in favor of heavier sanctions on Iran somewhere other than a joint meeting of Congress.... Last week, Netanyahu called Pelosi, Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, and New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate, in hopes of blunting their opposition to the invitation from Boehner, R-Ohio. The issue has split many U.S. Jewish organizations and communities, with some liberal groups criticizing the planned speech and others cheering it.”

I personally want to see the US make positive bonds with all Middle Eastern and other Islamic countries which are not ruled by radical jihadists, and and which are stable in their government. Too much of the region has no capability of peace and social advancement – fair treatment of women, a representative elected government, and freedom of speech and the press. Of course Israel hates Iran for its ties with Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which are avowed enemies of Israel. In my view, however, Israel has made no effort to find peace with its neighbors, and wants Western help to carry out its ongoing wars, whether or not that favors Western interests. I am worried that a third world war will one day break out over the Israeli-Arab conflicts, and besides I'm tired of war. I really did hope to see world peace in my lifetime, but that is probably not to be.





http://news.yahoo.com/ferguson-police-testing-non-lethal-gun-attachment-in-wake-of-michael-brown-s-death--report-170126288.html

Ferguson police testing 'less lethal' gun attachment; critics fear 'moral hazard,' safety
By Michael Walsh
February 4, 2015

Ferguson police are testing new methods of incapacitating suspects — six months after a highly controversial police shooting involving one of their officers.

This week, five instructors for the Missouri city’s police department are training to use a "less lethal" device, called the Alternative, which has enough force to knock a suspect to the ground but not kill him or her.

The Alternative is a small orange device that attaches to the top of a normal handgun and extends a Ping-Pong-ball-sized projectile in front of the muzzle.

After traveling through the barrel, the bullet embeds itself inside the alloy projectile, and the docking unit immediately detaches from the weapon, according to the manufacturer.

This process decreases the bullet's velocity and dampens its impact. The bullet, then, should not pierce a human’s skin and cause the type of internal damage that would kill the person. However, it retains enough blunt force to knock someone over and deliver severe, debilitating pain.

Christian Ellis, founder and CEO of Alternative Ballistics, says Ferguson police reached out to him after an extensive Google search.

“After the Michael Brown shooting, they were very concerned about taking lives and making sure that they are proactive,” he said in an interview with Yahoo News. "These guys are taking it very seriously. They really like the technology, and I think they are doing the right thing by giving their officers more tools so they can deal with deadly force encounters in different ways."

Ellis was in Ferguson training officers to use the technology when the Washington Post broke the news that they were planning to adopt the technology.

California-based manufacturer Alternative Ballistics says the device "represents a critical 'missing link' between lethal force and less lethal force."

As Ellis said, “This product isn’t to be used when the officer’s life is in danger or a civilian’s life is in danger. Obviously if someone has a gun or bomb, the officers have to react. But there are some situations where officers do have the time to make a different option.”

While the Alternative may sound like a good solution for police departments, there could be some unintended risks.

Steven Horwitz, professor of economics at St. Lawrence University, who sometimes applies the laws of economics to situations beyond the realm of finance, fears that this device could result in something economists call a “moral hazard.”

“By insuring officers against the less bad outcome, you are actually encouraging them to engage in riskier behavior,” he said in an interview with Yahoo News.

Horwitz argues that the assumption behind the creation of this device is that one shot with this less damaging bullet is substituting for one shot with a regular bullet. But it might end up substituting the less damaging bullet for no bullets at all.

“It’s certainly possible that this would lead officers to be more likely to use their guns at all in situations where they might not otherwise,” he said.

This concern is similar to the argument that football helmets embolden players to take greater risks with their heads — such as using them as weapons — than they would otherwise, as previously outlined by Horwitz and others. If this is true, helmets counterintuitively exacerbate the very problems of concussions and other head injuries they are intended to address.

Ellis and his colleague Bob Herrmann, a spokesman for Alternative Ballistics, on the other hand, do not buy this line of thinking.

They say that officers will be instructed to use this device only when the occasion calls for it.

“I think they’ll use this device when it’s safe and prudent to use it,” Herrmann said. “It’s designed to be used in a situation where lethal force is justified but may not be the best solution."

Others worry that the few seconds it would take to attach the Alternative could give a suspect the upper hand.

Dan Zimmerman, a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment and managing editor of the Truth About Guns, says that in the heat of the moment, this device could lead to even more problems.

“The biggest problem is that one of the things you never do is point your gun in the direction of anything you are not willing to destroy,” he told Yahoo News, referring to gun expert Jeff Cooper’s four basic rules for firearm safety. “In effect, always point your gun in a safe direction.”

Zimmerman says this device makes it more likely for a cop to put his hand in front of the muzzle. If not well trained, the officer might also have his finger on the trigger, which could result in the loss of his hand, Zimmerman argued.

“You’re talking in the heat of the moment,” he said. “This is a fast-developing situation. It’s an inherently dangerous arrangement.”

Herrmann, however, said that there is no reason for anyone to put their fingers in front of the muzzle.

The Ferguson Police Department, which reportedly intends to distribute the Alternative to all of its officers, found itself at the center of national debates over policing and race relations after then-Officer Darren Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown last August.

A representative for the department was not immediately available for comment.



http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/moralhazard.asp

Moral Hazard

DEFINITION OF 'MORAL HAZARD'

The risk that a party to a transaction has not entered into the contract in good faith, has provided misleading information about its assets, liabilities or credit capacity, or has an incentive to take unusual risks in a desperate attempt to earn a profit before the contract settles.
INVESTOPEDIA EXPLAINS 'MORAL HAZARD'

Moral hazard can be present any time two parties come into agreement with one another. Each party in a contract may have the opportunity to gain from acting contrary to the principles laid out by the agreement. For example, when a salesperson is paid a flat salary with no commissions for his or her sales, there is a danger that the salesperson may not try very hard to sell the business owner's goods because the wage stays the same regardless of how much or how little the owner benefits from the salesperson's work. 

Moral hazard can be somewhat reduced by the placing of responsibilities on both parties of a contract. In the example of the salesperson, the manager may decide to pay a wage comprised of both salary and commissions. With such a wage, the salesperson would have more incentive not only to produce more profits but also to prevent losses for the company.




“This week, five instructors for the Missouri city’s police department are training to use a "less lethal" device, called the Alternative, which has enough force to knock a suspect to the ground but not kill him or her. The Alternative is a small orange device that attaches to the top of a normal handgun and extends a Ping-Pong-ball-sized projectile in front of the muzzle. After traveling through the barrel, the bullet embeds itself inside the alloy projectile, and the docking unit immediately detaches from the weapon, according to the manufacturer. This process decreases the bullet's velocity and dampens its impact. The bullet, then, should not pierce a human’s skin and cause the type of internal damage that would kill the person. However, it retains enough blunt force to knock someone over and deliver severe, debilitating pain.... "These guys are taking it very seriously. They really like the technology, and I think they are doing the right thing by giving their officers more tools so they can deal with deadly force encounters in different ways."... As Ellis said, “This product isn’t to be used when the officer’s life is in danger or a civilian’s life is in danger. Obviously if someone has a gun or bomb, the officers have to react. But there are some situations where officers do have the time to make a different option.” While the Alternative may sound like a good solution for police departments, there could be some unintended risks.... Others worry that the few seconds it would take to attach the Alternative could give a suspect the upper hand."


“Horwitz argues that the assumption behind the creation of this device is that one shot with this less damaging bullet is substituting for one shot with a regular bullet. But it might end up substituting the less damaging bullet for no bullets at all.” This statement brings to mind two incidents in the past. The first was a case when a man died from taser use when the officer triggered the tazer too many times. Once or at least twice should disable an assailant. Another case involved pepper spray and a group of student peace activists on a sit in. The officer took the canister of spray and held it a couple of inches from their eyes and sprayed them heavily in the eyes to cause maximum pain. That struck me as being obscenely cruel. The students were sitting in the street with their arms linked, not in any violent way resisting arrest. Both of those instances were caused by pure spite on the part of the officers.

This article states that the Alternative causes great pain though it doesn't break the skin. I would like to suggest that it also could possibly break a small bone such as the lower arm, ribs or collarbone. I wouldn't like to see officers start using this Alternative just purposely to cause “severe, debilitating pain,” when their brain and words could be used to defuse the situation instead -- real community policing. Still, this is progress over pumping 5 or 6 bullets into a man who runs away (one of the two fear responses that we have as humans, the other one being to fight.) I still wonder why we hear so little about all police officers being trained in mixed martial arts or some other effective way of fighting that is not aimed to kill. Though it is possible to kill an opponent with martial arts, most of the fighting is not lethal, but capable of completely vanquishing him nonetheless. I suspect the truth is that they aren't usually trained to fight very much at all, just to shoot. Still, maybe this device will make a real difference in the number of fatal shootings that occur. I'm glad to see that Ferguson is not stubbornly refusing to make any positive changes.





http://news.yahoo.com/jordan-executes-two-iraqi-militants-response-pilots-death-033203764.html

Jordanian king vows 'relentless' war on Islamic State's own ground
Reuters By Suleiman Al-Khalidi
February 4, 2015

AMMAN (Reuters) - Jordan's King Abdullah vowed a "relentless" war against Islamic State on their own territory on Wednesday in response to a video published by the hard-line group showing a captured Jordanian air force pilot being burned alive in a cage.

Jordan hanged two Iraqi jihadists, one a woman, on Wednesday and vowed to intensify military action against Islamic State.

"We are waging this war to protect our faith, our values and human principles and our war for their sake will be relentless and will hit them in their own ground," state television quoted the king as saying during a security meeting.

U.S. officials said on Wednesday that the United Arab Emirates had withdrawn from flying air strikes in the U.S.-led coalition campaign against Islamic State after the Jordanian pilot's plane went down over Syria in December.

Jordan, which is part of the U.S.-led alliance, had promised an "earth-shaking response" to the killing of its pilot, Mouath al-Kasaesbeh, who was captured after his F-16 crashed.

Government spokesman Mohammad al-Momani said on Wednesday: "We are talking about a collaborative effort between coalition members to intensify efforts to stop extremism and terrorism to undermine, degrade and eventually finish Daesh." Daesh is used as a derogatory Arabic term for Islamic State.

He said it was a continuation of Jordan's long standing policy in fighting hard-line Islamist militants and that King Abdullah, who cut short a trip to the United States, headed a meeting with senior security officials on Wednesday.

"All the state's military and security agencies are developing their options. Jordan's response will be heard by the world at large but this response on the security and military level will be announced at the appropriate time," Momani said.

Islamic State had demanded the release of Sajida al-Rishawi in exchange for a Japanese hostage whom it later beheaded. Sentenced to death for her role in a 2005 suicide bomb attack in Amman, Rishawi was executed at dawn.

Jordan also executed a senior al Qaeda prisoner, Ziyad Karboli, an Iraqi man who was sentenced to death in 2008.

The Jordanian pilot was the first from the coalition known to have been captured and killed by Islamic State.

Jordan is a major U.S. ally in the fight against hardline Islamist groups and hosted U.S. troops during operations that led to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. It is home to hundreds of U.S. military trainers bolstering defences at the Syrian and Iraqi borders, and is determined to keep the jihadists in Syria away from its frontier.

CALLS FOR REVENGE

The fate of Kasaesbeh, a member of a large tribe that forms the backbone of support for the country's Hashemite monarchy, has gripped Jordan for weeks.

Some Jordanians had criticised the king for embroiling them in the U.S.-led war that they said would provoke a militant backlash but the pilot's killing produced a wave of outrage and calls for revenge.

Jordan's authorities have not commented on how many missions the air force has carried out against Islamic State.

In a televised statement to the nation, the king urged national unity and said the killing was a cowardly act of terror by a criminal group that has no relation to Islam.

Muslim clerics across the Middle East, even those sympathetic to the jihadist cause, also expressed outrage, saying such a form of killing was considered despicable by Islam.

President Barack Obama's nominee for defense secretary Ashton Carter on Wednesday vowed to understand and resolve reported delays in U.S. arms sales to Jordan.

Obama has sought to attract a broad coalition, drawing on as many regional countries as possible, to avoid the appearance that the campaign is just an endeavour involving Western powers.

The U.S. officials who said the UAE had withdrawn from the air campaign spoke on condition of anonymity. "I can confirm that UAE suspended air strikes shortly after the Jordanian pilot's plane went down, but let me be clear that UAE continues to be an important and valuable partner that is contributing to the coalition," one official said.

There was widespread shock and anger across Jordan at the brutality of the pilot's killing, which drew international condemnation.

The European Union combined a statement of solidarity with Jordan over the killing of the pilots with criticism of its immediate execution of two Iraqi jihadists.

"I want the state to get revenge for my son's blood through more executions of those people who follow this criminal group that shares nothing with Islam," Safi al-Kasaesbeh told Reuters.

Islamic State has seized large areas of Iraq and Syria, Jordan's neighbours to the north and east.

In the pilot's home village of Ay, mourners said Jordanians must rally around the state. "Today we put our differences behind us and rally behind the king and nation," said Jabar Sarayrah, a shopkeeper.

DAWN EXECUTION

The prisoners were executed in Swaqa prison, 70 km (45 miles) south of Amman, just before dawn, a security source who was familiar with the case said. "They were both calm and showed no emotions and just prayed," he added without elaborating.

Rishawi, in her mid-forties, was part of an al Qaeda network that targeted three Amman hotels in suicide bombings in 2005. She was meant to die in one of the attacks - the worst in Jordan's history - but her suicide bomb belt did not go off.

Only two other prisoners are on death row in Jordan - Mohammad Hassan al Sahli, a Syrian who was convicted of plotting and executing a rocket attack in August 2005 against a U.S. navy vessel and the Israeli port city of Eilat, and Jordanian Muamar Jaghbeer, a leading al Qaeda operative.

There are at least 250 Islamist militants in prison, almost half of them were arrested in the past year and are Islamic State sympathisers.

Jordan said on Tuesday the pilot had been killed a month ago. The government had been picking up intelligence for weeks that the pilot was killed some time ago, a source close to the government said.

"The horror of the killing, the method of killing is probably going to generate more short-term support for the state," said a Western diplomat. "But once that horror dies down, inevitably some of the questions revert on Jordan’s role in the coalition."

The Syrian government condemned the killing and urged Jordan to cooperate with it in a fight against Islamic State and the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front in Syria. The United States has ruled out Syria as a partner in the campaign against Islamic State, describing President Bashar al-Assad as part of the problem.

The executed woman came from Iraq's Anbar province bordering Jordan. Her tribal Iraqi relatives were close aides of the slain Jordanian leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, from whose group Islamic State emerged.

Islamic State had demanded her release in exchange for the life of Japanese journalist Kenji Goto. However, Goto was beheaded by the group, video released last Saturday showed.

Jordan had insisted that they would only release the woman as part of a deal to free the pilot.




“Jordan hanged two Iraqi jihadists, one a woman, on Wednesday and vowed to intensify military action against Islamic State. "We are waging this war to protect our faith, our values and human principles and our war for their sake will be relentless and will hit them in their own ground," state television quoted the king as saying during a security meeting. U.S. officials said on Wednesday that the United Arab Emirates had withdrawn from flying air strikes in the U.S.-led coalition campaign against Islamic State after the Jordanian pilot's plane went down over Syria in December.... Government spokesman Mohammad al-Momani said on Wednesday: "We are talking about a collaborative effort between coalition members to intensify efforts to stop extremism and terrorism to undermine, degrade and eventually finish Daesh." Daesh is used as a derogatory Arabic term for Islamic State.... "All the state's military and security agencies are developing their options. Jordan's response will be heard by the world at large but this response on the security and military level will be announced at the appropriate time," Momani said.... Jordan is a major U.S. ally in the fight against hardline Islamist groups and hosted U.S. troops during operations that led to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. It is home to hundreds of U.S. military trainers bolstering defenses at the Syrian and Iraqi borders, and is determined to keep the jihadists in Syria away from its frontier.... Muslim clerics across the Middle East, even those sympathetic to the jihadist cause, also expressed outrage, saying such a form of killing was considered despicable by Islam. President Barack Obama's nominee for defense secretary Ashton Carter on Wednesday vowed to understand and resolve reported delays in U.S. arms sales to Jordan. Obama has sought to attract a broad coalition, drawing on as many regional countries as possible, to avoid the appearance that the campaign is just an endeavour involving Western powers.”

Hopefully the US will stop holding up the arms order for Jordan because we need them to join the fight against ISIS. "We are talking about a collaborative effort between coalition members to intensify efforts to stop extremism and terrorism to undermine, degrade and eventually finish Daesh." Jordan is one more brick in the wall, and their people have a strong incentive to fight ISIS. They are concerned that the group may cross their borders as well as Syria and Iraq. May they make headway against the unusually evil group. I hope they will chose to fight on the ground alongside the Kurds. The more soldiers the better. All the other countries have been doing only air strikes.







http://news.yahoo.com/north-korea-strikes-down-us-talks-vows-final-020143607.html

North Korea strikes down US talks, vows 'final doom'
AFP By Park Chan-Kyong
February 4, 2015

North Korea on Wednesday ruled out resuming dialogue with the "gangster-like" United States, and vowed to respond to any US aggression with nuclear strikes and cyber warfare.

Related Stories
1. North Korea says it sees no need to negotiate with 'gangster' U.S Reuters
2. South Korea, China to resume North Korea nuclear talks AFP
3. North Korea says U.S. rejects invitation to Pyongyang Reuters
4. US ex-officials meet N. Korean nuclear chief amid standoff Associated Press
5. North Korea may be restarting nuke plant: US institute Associated Pres

The bellicose statement from the country's top military body, the National Defence Commission (NDC), came after reported moves by Washington and Pyongyang to revive long-stalled six-nation talks on denuclearisation.

It also preceded the start in early March of annual joint US-South Korea military exercises that always presage a sharp spike in military tensions and rhetoric on the divided peninsula.

The NDC statement was an apparent reaction to remarks Barack Obama made regarding the eventual collapse of the regime in North Korea, which the US president called the "most cut-off nation on Earth".

The NDC statement, which labelled the Obama administration a mud-slinging "cesspool," said the president's comments amounted to a threat to engineer the country's downfall.

"Since the gangster-like US imperialists are blaring that they will 'bring down' the DPRK (North Korea)... the army and people of the DPRK cannot but officially notify the Obama administration... that the DPRK has neither need nor willingness to sit at negotiating table with the US any longer," the NDC said.

The statement, carried by the North's official KCNA news agency and titled "US imperialists will face final doom," said North Korea would respond to any US military aggression in kind -- whether with conventional, nuclear or cyber forces.

Obama slapped sanctions on North Korea last month following the hacking of Hollywood studio Sony Pictures' computer network.

US officials blamed the attack on Pyongyang and described it as the most damaging commercial hack in US history.

North Korea, which is known to have built up a formidable cyber warfare unit, has officially denied any involvement.

The Washington Post reported on Monday that US and North Korean nuclear envoys had been secretly discussing the idea of "talks about talks", but had been unable to agree on practical arrangements.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki stressed the US had not changed its position of requiring the North to take tangible steps towards denuclearisation before any meaningful dialogue can be held.

North Korea carried out nuclear tests in 2006, 2009 and 2013.

The aim of the six-party talks is to persuade the North to scrap its nuclear weapons in return for aid and other incentives such as security guarantees and diplomatic normalisation.

Last month, North Korea offered to suspend future nuclear tests temporarily if Washington cancels its annual military drills with the South.

Pyongyang views the joint exercises as provocative rehearsals for invasions, while Seoul and Washington insist they are purely defensive in nature.

The NDC statement said the North was capable of bringing about the "final ruin of the US" with its "precision and diversified nuclear striking means."

Hong Hyun-Ik, a senior researcher at the Sejong Institute think-tank in Seoul, said neither North Korea nor the United States appeared particularly sincere about the idea of dialogue.

The United States needs a "trouble-making" North Korea" to rally support from its allies for its ultimate strategy of keeping China's growing influence in check in the region, Hong said.
'
At the same time, with its economy in better shape than the past, North Korea feels "no sense of urgency" about resuming talks.

"Against this backdrop, neither North Korea nor the United States wants to take the initiative for a breakthrough," Hong said.




“North Korea on Wednesday ruled out resuming dialogue with the "gangster-like" United States, and vowed to respond to any US aggression with nuclear strikes and cyber warfare.... The bellicose statement from the country's top military body, the National Defence Commission (NDC), came after reported moves by Washington and Pyongyang to revive long-stalled six-nation talks on denuclearisation. It also preceded the start in early March of annual joint US-South Korea military exercises that always presage a sharp spike in military tensions and rhetoric on the divided peninsula.... a mud-slinging "cesspool," the gangster-like US imperialists, "US imperialists will face final doom," said North Korea would respond to any US military aggression in kind -- whether with conventional, nuclear or cyber forces.... The aim of the six-party talks is to persuade the North to scrap its nuclear weapons in return for aid and other incentives such as security guarantees and diplomatic normalisation. Last month, North Korea offered to suspend future nuclear tests temporarily if Washington cancels its annual military drills with the South.... Hong Hyun-Ik, a senior researcher at the Sejong Institute think-tank in Seoul, said neither North Korea nor the United States appeared particularly sincere about the idea of dialogue. The United States needs a "trouble-making" North Korea" to rally support from its allies for its ultimate strategy of keeping China's growing influence in check in the region, Hong said.”

I guess if the game is chess you have to have kings, queens, knights and rooks. An inveterate enemy is essential, especially if our relatively peaceful relationship with China isn't quite stable. Meanwhile, there is Russia threatening Western powers through its move into Ukraine, after ten years or so of greater cooperation especially in the space efforts, and the “barbaric hoards” not unlike Genghis Khan rampaging in the Middle East. Some say that all wars are actually about money, in this case maybe oil. It's tiresome and unnerving to have made no real progress since the 1950's. Speaking of Russia, see the article below.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/does-vladimir-putin-have-aspergers-syndrome/

Does Vladimir Putin have Asperger's syndrome?
By U-JIN LEE CBS NEWS
February 5, 2015

A 2008 Pentagon report claims Russian President Vladimir Putin has Asperger's syndrome, according to a copy of the study obtained by CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin.

The research was conducted by the Office of Net Assessment, a secretive, internal Pentagon think tank. It defined Asperger's syndrome as "an autistic disorder which affects all of his decisions."

The analysis is solely based on videos of Putin's public actions, dating back to the year 2000. The researchers did not claim to have access to any data from scans of Putin's brain.

According to the report, "Putin's neurological development was significantly interrupted in infancy."

The study also hypothesizes that Putin suffered an "insult" to his brain while he was still in his mother's womb and that she may have suffered a stroke while pregnant with him. Researchers theorized that may have affected the way Putin thinks and moves the right side of his body.

"His primary form of compensation for his disorder is extreme control and this is reflected in his decision style and how he governs," the report says.

It concludes that Putin's hard-wired personal style is likely to change very little.



Asperger syndrome
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Asperger syndrome (AS), also known as Asperger's syndrome,Asperger disorder (AD) or simply Asperger's, is an autism spectrumdisorder (ASD) that is characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction and nonverbal communication, alongside restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests. It differs from other autism spectrum disorders by its relative preservation of linguistic and cognitive development. Although not required for diagnosis, physical clumsiness and atypical (peculiar or odd) use of language are frequently reported.[1][2] The diagnosis of Asperger's was eliminated in the 2013 fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM-5) and replaced by a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder on a severity scale.[3]

The syndrome is named after the Austrian pediatrician Hans Aspergerwho, in 1944, studied and described children in his practice who lacked nonverbal communication skills, demonstrated limited empathy with their peers, and were physically clumsy.[4] The modern conception of Asperger syndrome came into existence in 1981[5] and went through a period of popularization,[6][7] becoming standardized as a diagnosis in the early 1990s. Many questions and controversies remain about aspects of the disorder.[8] There is doubt about whether it is distinct from high-functioning autism (HFA);[9] partly because of this, its prevalence is not firmly established.[1]

The exact cause of Asperger's is unknown. Although research suggests the likelihood of a genetic basis,[1] there is no known genetic cause[10][11] and brain imaging techniques have not identified a clear common pathology.[1] There is no single treatment, and the effectiveness of particular interventions is supported by only limited data.[1] Intervention is aimed at improving symptoms and function. The mainstay of management is behavioral therapy, focusing on specific deficits to address poor communication skills, obsessive or repetitive routines, and physical clumsiness.[12] Most children improve as they mature to adulthood, but social and communication difficulties may persist.[8] Some researchers and people with Asperger's have advocated a shift in attitudes toward the view that it is a difference, rather than a disability that must be treated or cured.[13][14]

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines Asperger syndrome (AS) as one of the autism spectrum disorders(ASD) or pervasive developmental disorders (PDD), which are a spectrum of psychological conditions that are characterized by abnormalities of social interaction and communication that pervade the individual's functioning, and by restricted and repetitive interests and behavior. Like other psychological development disorders, ASD begins in infancy or childhood, has a steady course without remission or relapse, and has impairments that result from maturation-related changes in various systems of the brain.[24] ASD, in turn, is a subset of the broader autism phenotype, which describes individuals who may not have ASD but do have autistic-like traits, such as social deficits.[

Social interaction

A lack of demonstrated empathy has a significant impact on aspects of communal living for persons with Asperger syndrome.[2] Individuals with AS experience difficulties in basic elements of social interaction, which may include a failure to develop friendships or to seek shared enjoyments or achievements with others (for example, showing others objects of interest), a lack of social or emotional reciprocity (social "games" give-and-take mechanic), and impaired nonverbal behaviors in areas such as eye contact, facial expression, posture, and gesture.[1]

People with AS may not be as withdrawn around others compared to those with other, more debilitating forms ofautism; they approach others, even if awkwardly. For example, a person with AS may engage in a one-sided, long-winded speech about a favorite topic, while misunderstanding or not recognizing the listener's feelings or reactions, such as a wish to change the topic of talk or end the interaction.[9] This social awkwardness has been called "active but odd".[1] This failure to react appropriately to social interaction may appear as disregard for other people's feelings, and may come across as insensitive.[9] However, not all individuals with AS will approach others. Some of them may even display selective mutism, speaking not at all to most people and excessively to specific people. Some may choose only to talk to people they like.[28]

The cognitive ability of children with AS often allows them to articulate social norms in a laboratory context,[1] where they may be able to show a theoretical understanding of other people's emotions; however, they typically have difficulty acting on this knowledge in fluid, real-life situations.[9] People with AS may analyze and distill their observations of social interaction into rigid behavioral guidelines, and apply these rules in awkward ways, such as forced eye contact, resulting in a demeanor that appears rigid or socially naive. Childhood desire for companionship can become numbed through a history of failed social encounters.[1]

The hypothesis that individuals with AS are predisposed to violent or criminal behavior has been investigated, but is not supported by data.[1][29] More evidence suggests children with AS are victims rather than victimizers.[30] A 2008 review found that an overwhelming number of reported violent criminals with AS had coexisting psychiatric disorders such asschizoaffective disorder.[31]

Speech and language

Although individuals with Asperger syndrome acquire language skills without significant general delay and their speech typically lacks significant abnormalities, language acquisition and use is often atypical.[9] Abnormalities include verbosity, abrupt transitions, literal interpretations and miscomprehension of nuance, use of metaphor meaningful only to the speaker, auditory perception deficits, unusually pedantic, formal or idiosyncratic speech, and oddities in loudness, pitch, intonation, prosody, and rhythm.[1] Echolalia has also been observed in individuals with AS.[35]

Children with AS may have an unusually sophisticated vocabulary at a young age and have been colloquially called "little professors", but have difficulty understanding figurative language and tend to use language literally.[1] Children with AS appear to have particular weaknesses in areas of nonliteral language that include humor, irony, teasing, and sarcasm. Although individuals with AS usually understand the cognitive basis of humor, they seem to lack understanding of the intent of humor to share enjoyment with others.[15] Despite strong evidence of impaired humor appreciation, anecdotal reports of humor in individuals with AS seem to challenge some psychological theories of AS and autism.[36]




"His primary form of compensation for his disorder is extreme control and this is reflected in his decision style and how he governs," the report says. It concludes that Putin's hard-wired personal style is likely to change very little,” says this article on Putin. I don't generally think of Autism patients as being single mindedly aggressive as Putin is, but rather withdrawn and sometimes unable to meet the eye in conversation. This article on Asperger's does, however, speak of their sometimes having a rigid and blank facial expression, and he is a little like that. I've never seen a picture of him in which he smiled.

AS is not as severe an impairment as Autism, the article said, especially in actual mental impairment. In the wonderful movie “Rain Man” the character, while having some mental deficits, was a mathematical genius and his brother took him to Las Vegas to beat the house on gambling games, which he did do. In the TV show “Bones” which is currently showing, the lead female character is portrayed as brilliant in her scientific field, but mentally withdrawn and “odd,” and unable to understand people when they make jokes. The story doesn't say that she has AS, but I think the writer of the scripts is perhaps purposely playing her in that way to create an unusual character that will make the show more interesting.

As for Putin, however, I don't see how the CIA could make a diagnosis of him from a film clip of his behavior in which he made a certain gesture with his right hand. This article does speak of “odd” physical movements in AS patients, so maybe he does display one of those. I knew a young girl who had an odd “hand-flapping” behavior that may have been a sign of AS. She grew up to become a nurse, so she was not mentally impaired, but AS patients generally aren't. I think maybe the character in the movie Forrest Gump may have had Autism or AS. He was not a brilliant person, but did grow up to own his own fishing business, so he had some savvy for practical things. Whether this should make us underestimate Putin as a rival or enemy, however, I would hope that the Pentagon or the President won't do that. I think he is definitely crafty and involved in a strong competition with the US, plus perhaps a personal drive to become famous as a great Russian leader. He appears to be trying to take over the old lands that Russia lost in 1990 – not AS behavior I wouldn't think.