Friday, December 21, 2007

George W. Bush's Convenient Truth

by: Walter M. Brasch



The man whom the people elected in 2000 to be president was in the temporary residence of the man whom the Supreme Court anointed.

President George W. Bush hosted former Vice-President Al Gore, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, and five other Nobel laureates, Nov. 26. This annual handshake photo-op has been an American tradition.

The Nobel committee had cited Gore, Oct. 12 , as “probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted” to reduce global warming. Gore shared the Nobel Peace Prize with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a UN network of about 2,000 scientists, who have shown that global warming isn’t a liberal conspiracy theory.

Believing that it is some kind of liberal conspiracy theory are the fringe right-wing who dominate Talk Radio and Pundit TV. The day after the announcement, Steve Doocy, co-anchor of FOX’s morning show, set the tone for the rabid-dog attacks. He produced a chart of past Nobel Peace Prize laureates, including “that crazy Jimmy Carter,” and claimed the award is nothing more than an “anti-Bush” trophy. On CNN, guest commentator Marlo Lewis, who was identified as a global warming expert, called Gore’s writings manipulative, misleading, and exaggerated. Jay Richards of the National Review claimed the Peace prize is “politicized.” Rush Limbaugh, who had a front group nominate him for the Peace Prize only to learn that the Landmark Legal Foundation had no standing to nominate anyone, was furious that Gore, not he, received the honor. With the microphone of more than 600 radio stations that carry his talk show, Limbaugh claimed his lawyers—the ones at the Landmark group—“are looking into the possibility of filing an objection with the Nobel Committee over the unethical tampering for this award that Al Gore is engaging in.” He claimed, “This is clearly above and beyond the pale. I mean, this might happen in high school class president elections and so forth, but this is shameless.”

Bloggers chattered almost endlessly that not only didn’t Gore deserve the award but also that global warming is a myth. The Nobel committee, blogged William Teach of Pirate’s Cove, “has basically surrendered to hysterics, mass exaggerators, and liars.”

Also doubting global warming, and volumes of scientific evidence, is Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), former chair of the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee, and recipient of one of the largest cumulative campaign donations from the oil and gas industry. Inhofe has claimed that there is “compelling evidence” that global warming not only is a hoax, but that it is “the greatest hoax ever perpetuated on the American people.”

George H.W. Bush, during his failed re-election campaign in 1992, called Gore “Ozone Man,” and claimed the vice-presidential candidate was “so far out in the environmental extreme we’ll be up to our necks in owls and outta work for every American.”

As for the current President Bush, he delegated the “congratulations” to a deputy press secretary. Tony Fratto told the media that Bush is not only “happy for Vice President Gore,” but also happy for the UN scientists who co-shared the award. “Obviously, it’s an important recognition, and we’re sure the vice president is thrilled,” said Fratto, dripping with insincerity.

The Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader, one of the nation’s most conservative newspapers, claimed, “The Nobel Peace Prize is worse than a joke. It's a fraud,” and called the prize a “useless medal.” The Wall Street Journal didn’t even mention Gore in its editorial the day the Nobel committee made its announcement, but listed several others who should be considered for the award. The Journal’s unscientific poll of its largely conservative upper middle-class and upper class readers that day revealed that 54 percent didn’t think Al Gore deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. One reader, reflecting the opinion of about 13,000 who disagreed with the award, called it “a joke and it encourages the pursuit of junk science for political gain.” Another reader believed, “The fear being installed from man made global warming is now officially a communist plot to control behavior.” However, among the 11,250 who believed the award was justified was one reader who believed that Al Gore, the former journalist, “did what the National Academy of Sciences could not do—explain the issue in a way that non-scientists can understand.”

For more than three decades, Al Gore has been one of the nation’s strongest voices for the protection of the environment. His first book, Earth in the Balance (1992), had pushed protection of the environment onto the national political agenda; as vice-president, he became the Clinton Administration’s primary advocate to protect the environment and the nation’s natural resources.

During the past seven years, Gore co-founded a major TV cable network (Current TV), which was honored with an Emmy in 2007; wrote the best-selling book about the effects of global warming, An Inconvenient Truth (2006), which was turned into a box office hit that won an Oscar for the best documentary; wrote a best-seller, The Assault on Reason (2007), which received the Quill Award for history/current events/politics; and increased his public appearances to speak out about a number of social issues, including environmental protection.

During the past seven years, George W. Bush spun a nation not only into a war that has destroyed the environment and natural resources of Iraq, but had also begun a war in America that is leading to a destruction of its environment and natural resources. President Bush consistently ignored the evidence of global warming, and suppressed the views of government scientists. He allowed Enron and other energy companies to direct the nation’s energy policy. With a cabinet that includes persons who either were employed by large oil and coal companies or were paid lobbyists against environmental protections, he reduced federal environmental rules. He believes that most of the 250 million acres under jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management should be available so private industry can strip the resources for their own economic gain. He has allowed extensive off-shore drilling, increased the incursion by mining companies, and allowed logging companies to devastate federal lands. He is a leading advocate for allowing oil companies to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, claiming it’s for “national security,” but completely oblivious to the reality that such intrusion would severely alter the balance of nature, while yielding little gas and oil for the American people. He has permitted gas-spewing recreational vehicles to tear up federal parks and permanently disturb the wildlife. He reversed himself on a campaign pledge to reduce acceptable levels of carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants, and determined that higher levels of arsenic and other toxins in drinking water was acceptable. He reduced the effectiveness of the Environmental Protection Agency, preferring companies to undergo “voluntary compliance,” and eliminated the tax upon the oil and chemical industries that paid for the clean up of SuperFund toxic waste sites. It’s now the taxpayers not polluters who are paying for clean-up operations.

Within months of his first inaugural, Bush withdrew the United States from the Kyoto Protocol that called for global environmental protection by stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions. With Australia about to sign the Protocol, 173 nations will have signed the agreement; the U.S. is now the only industrialized nation not to sign.

And now, on a Monday evening after Thanksgiving, President George W. Bush was meeting with five American Nobel laureates, including Al Gore. By all accounts, a 40-minute private meeting with Mr. Gore was “cordial.” The President, after snubbing the former vice-president when the Nobel committee made its announcement, could now be cordial. He had personally called Gore to make sure the former vice-president was available, and was willing to rearrange the White House schedule to accommodate Mr. Gore. At the post-Thanksgiving ceremony, Bush could smile and backslap. After all, George W. Bush was president, and nothing that Al Gore was doing to protect the environment would ever be enough to erase this president’s political ability to alter the environment to benefit corporate interests.

George W. Bush's Convenient Truth

by: Walter M. Brasch



The man whom the people elected in 2000 to be president was in the temporary residence of the man whom the Supreme Court anointed.

President George W. Bush hosted former Vice-President Al Gore, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, and five other Nobel laureates, Nov. 26. This annual handshake photo-op has been an American tradition.

The Nobel committee had cited Gore, Oct. 12 , as “probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted” to reduce global warming. Gore shared the Nobel Peace Prize with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a UN network of about 2,000 scientists, who have shown that global warming isn’t a liberal conspiracy theory.

Believing that it is some kind of liberal conspiracy theory are the fringe right-wing who dominate Talk Radio and Pundit TV. The day after the announcement, Steve Doocy, co-anchor of FOX’s morning show, set the tone for the rabid-dog attacks. He produced a chart of past Nobel Peace Prize laureates, including “that crazy Jimmy Carter,” and claimed the award is nothing more than an “anti-Bush” trophy. On CNN, guest commentator Marlo Lewis, who was identified as a global warming expert, called Gore’s writings manipulative, misleading, and exaggerated. Jay Richards of the National Review claimed the Peace prize is “politicized.” Rush Limbaugh, who had a front group nominate him for the Peace Prize only to learn that the Landmark Legal Foundation had no standing to nominate anyone, was furious that Gore, not he, received the honor. With the microphone of more than 600 radio stations that carry his talk show, Limbaugh claimed his lawyers—the ones at the Landmark group—“are looking into the possibility of filing an objection with the Nobel Committee over the unethical tampering for this award that Al Gore is engaging in.” He claimed, “This is clearly above and beyond the pale. I mean, this might happen in high school class president elections and so forth, but this is shameless.”

Bloggers chattered almost endlessly that not only didn’t Gore deserve the award but also that global warming is a myth. The Nobel committee, blogged William Teach of Pirate’s Cove, “has basically surrendered to hysterics, mass exaggerators, and liars.”

Also doubting global warming, and volumes of scientific evidence, is Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), former chair of the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee, and recipient of one of the largest cumulative campaign donations from the oil and gas industry. Inhofe has claimed that there is “compelling evidence” that global warming not only is a hoax, but that it is “the greatest hoax ever perpetuated on the American people.”

George H.W. Bush, during his failed re-election campaign in 1992, called Gore “Ozone Man,” and claimed the vice-presidential candidate was “so far out in the environmental extreme we’ll be up to our necks in owls and outta work for every American.”

As for the current President Bush, he delegated the “congratulations” to a deputy press secretary. Tony Fratto told the media that Bush is not only “happy for Vice President Gore,” but also happy for the UN scientists who co-shared the award. “Obviously, it’s an important recognition, and we’re sure the vice president is thrilled,” said Fratto, dripping with insincerity.

The Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader, one of the nation’s most conservative newspapers, claimed, “The Nobel Peace Prize is worse than a joke. It's a fraud,” and called the prize a “useless medal.” The Wall Street Journal didn’t even mention Gore in its editorial the day the Nobel committee made its announcement, but listed several others who should be considered for the award. The Journal’s unscientific poll of its largely conservative upper middle-class and upper class readers that day revealed that 54 percent didn’t think Al Gore deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. One reader, reflecting the opinion of about 13,000 who disagreed with the award, called it “a joke and it encourages the pursuit of junk science for political gain.” Another reader believed, “The fear being installed from man made global warming is now officially a communist plot to control behavior.” However, among the 11,250 who believed the award was justified was one reader who believed that Al Gore, the former journalist, “did what the National Academy of Sciences could not do—explain the issue in a way that non-scientists can understand.”

For more than three decades, Al Gore has been one of the nation’s strongest voices for the protection of the environment. His first book, Earth in the Balance (1992), had pushed protection of the environment onto the national political agenda; as vice-president, he became the Clinton Administration’s primary advocate to protect the environment and the nation’s natural resources.

During the past seven years, Gore co-founded a major TV cable network (Current TV), which was honored with an Emmy in 2007; wrote the best-selling book about the effects of global warming, An Inconvenient Truth (2006), which was turned into a box office hit that won an Oscar for the best documentary; wrote a best-seller, The Assault on Reason (2007), which received the Quill Award for history/current events/politics; and increased his public appearances to speak out about a number of social issues, including environmental protection.

During the past seven years, George W. Bush spun a nation not only into a war that has destroyed the environment and natural resources of Iraq, but had also begun a war in America that is leading to a destruction of its environment and natural resources. President Bush consistently ignored the evidence of global warming, and suppressed the views of government scientists. He allowed Enron and other energy companies to direct the nation’s energy policy. With a cabinet that includes persons who either were employed by large oil and coal companies or were paid lobbyists against environmental protections, he reduced federal environmental rules. He believes that most of the 250 million acres under jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management should be available so private industry can strip the resources for their own economic gain. He has allowed extensive off-shore drilling, increased the incursion by mining companies, and allowed logging companies to devastate federal lands. He is a leading advocate for allowing oil companies to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, claiming it’s for “national security,” but completely oblivious to the reality that such intrusion would severely alter the balance of nature, while yielding little gas and oil for the American people. He has permitted gas-spewing recreational vehicles to tear up federal parks and permanently disturb the wildlife. He reversed himself on a campaign pledge to reduce acceptable levels of carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants, and determined that higher levels of arsenic and other toxins in drinking water was acceptable. He reduced the effectiveness of the Environmental Protection Agency, preferring companies to undergo “voluntary compliance,” and eliminated the tax upon the oil and chemical industries that paid for the clean up of SuperFund toxic waste sites. It’s now the taxpayers not polluters who are paying for clean-up operations.

Within months of his first inaugural, Bush withdrew the United States from the Kyoto Protocol that called for global environmental protection by stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions. With Australia about to sign the Protocol, 173 nations will have signed the agreement; the U.S. is now the only industrialized nation not to sign.

And now, on a Monday evening after Thanksgiving, President George W. Bush was meeting with five American Nobel laureates, including Al Gore. By all accounts, a 40-minute private meeting with Mr. Gore was “cordial.” The President, after snubbing the former vice-president when the Nobel committee made its announcement, could now be cordial. He had personally called Gore to make sure the former vice-president was available, and was willing to rearrange the White House schedule to accommodate Mr. Gore. At the post-Thanksgiving ceremony, Bush could smile and backslap. After all, George W. Bush was president, and nothing that Al Gore was doing to protect the environment would ever be enough to erase this president’s political ability to alter the environment to benefit corporate interests.

16 Winston Churchill Quotes to Celebrate His Birthday

by: Noel Jameson



Power, prominence and a bit of a rebellious nature thrown in -- Winston Churchill quotes are definitely some of the most interesting you'll ever come across. For someone who was said to have a speech impediment, his words and message definitely did not suffer. This month, as we celebrate his birthday, let's remember Sir Winston Churchill with these 16 quotes.

1. "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

2. "A prisoner of war is a man who tries to kill you and fails, and then asks you not to kill him."

3. "Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things."

4. "There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only published opinion."

5. "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile -- hoping it will eat him last."

6. "Once in a while you will stumble upon the truth but most of us manage to pick ourselves up and hurry along as if nothing had happened."

7. "Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm."

8. "If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

9. "If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons."

10. "A love for tradition has never weakened a nation, indeed it has strengthened nations in their hour of peril."

11. "Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events."

12. "Never give in -- never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."

13. "The price of greatness is responsibility."

14. "The farther backward you can look, the further forward you are likely to see."

15. "Difficulties mastered are opportunities won."

16. "It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations."

So there you have it -- a glimpse inside the mind of an extraordinary man. Honor, courage, bravery -- think it's the stuff fairy tales are made of? Guess again. These 16 Winston Churchill quotes show us just how real they can be in the right man.

The Unknow Facts About Global Warming

by: James Heimler



The issues about global warming and the effects of global warming are continuously under debate. Somehow the debate has made its way into virtually every aspect of our lives. There is even thought that the issues about global warming are also applicable to the beliefs that other beings from other planets were forced to make themselves to Earth as their planet began to deteriorate, due to global warming.

It is all around us. It is on the weather stations. It faces us when we decide to purchase a new car or even a cleaning product. The real issues come when trying to learn about global warming. There is a lot of conflicting information on the internet and there is not one group that can agree on all aspects of the global warming debate.

Over the past century, with out a doubt, global temperatures have risen. While the rise in temperature has been only a degree or so, the concern is whether the Earth's temperatures will continue to rise and what impact that will have on the environment. The controversy about the warming of the earth is a result of conflicting evidence.

The fact that global warming also occurred in the prehistoric era is a scientific point. Some think a large meteor hitting the planet caused an big change in the earth's temperature. Is that what killed the dinosaurs? Science cannot prove this conclusively yet. The political and industrial lobbies further complicate conversations about global warming. The contention of these groups is that, we currently do not know enough about the effects of global warming to limit industrial emissions.

When will we know the full facts about global warming and will the global warming issue be resolved anytime soon? Unfortunately the answer is no. There will continue to be studies performed and there will always be a measure of doubt clouding the minds of citizens around the world. Perhaps, when enough data comes through, we will be able to make a determination based on scientific fact rather than theory. Until then we can continue to monitor the progress of scientists and try to do our part in conserving the environment.

The Bitch Labours A Few Points!

by: Michael Knell



Yo!

What a week it has been, hasn't it? Harold Wilson will be forever remembered telling us: "a week is a long time in politics", however with all the pettiness we have to suffer these days, it is fast becoming a long time for everyone in the UK regardless of their occupation. We are living in the slow motion of an occurring disaster.

Consider: the angels in children's school Nativity plays may no longer have wings, mince pies have been banned at school Christmas fetes, pantomimes are having to be re-written into being unrecognisable and unfunny, there are calls for our National Anthem to be changed, an elderly grandmother is told off by a council workman for sweeping the leaves from her front doorstep, a young mother is fined £360 for not keeping her wheelie bin full of rubbish within her tiny (8 foot by 4 foot) backyard where under the window the smell becomes intolerable despite regular cleaning, the police were called to a shopping centre because someone felt the schoolchildren performing there were singing the Christmas carols too loudly, a butcher has been banned from chopping meat after a new neighbour complained to the council about the noise, and despite the country footpaths across uneven grassy fields and moorland being non-negotiable safely by the disabled in wheelchairs, the kissing gates and stiles which allow access to them have got to be replaced with expensive cattle grids - presumably so anyone in a wheelchair can then sue the farmer for having a field that isn't perfectly flat should they suffer a tumble!

I could go on and on, the list of stupidities we live with today is seemingly endless, but I am in danger of becoming suicidal. Who wants to live in a world like this? What has happened to society? Why has: "love thy neighbour" all too often turned into: "persecute thy neighbour", with people wanting to complain and report somebody for simply living or doing their job? Where can anyone today use some common sense and make up their own mind about what they want to do, and what risks they are prepared to accept in doing it?

Political Correctness and Health & Safety issues have been around for quite some time but, whereas once any new proposal used to be ridiculed and dismissed were it not a sensible one, under these past ten years of Labour government rules and regulations to ensure we all live in exactly the same way, and that is in accordance to some insignificant people's idea of an ethical code, they have totally run riot. The freedom these prats have recently enjoyed is now detrimentally affecting the lives of every sensible person, and their self-given right to enforce their wishes upon the rest of us is at risk of soon becoming the only freedom left in the land. In our everyday lives we are not only being told exactly what to do, but when and how to do it and even the way in which we should be feeling about doing it - and all too often now these imposing rules become actual controls and are backed up by some ill thought through law which will penalise us and put money into either government or local authority coffers should we not wish to conform. We live in a preposterous world where our very own lives no longer belong to us. Give us back our lives!

Individuality? In this Nanny State we live in today, we may as well remove that word from the dictionary! Anyway, judging by how well the UK fared in the report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), where in reading ability our 15-year-olds dropped from being 7th in 2000 to 17th today and now lag behind countries such as Estonia and Liechtenstein, I doubt many could even spell the word! In science the UK dropped from being 4th to 14th, but worse than that in mathematics it was appalling news with the pupils falling from 8th position to 24th, which for the first time places our children below the international average. Having been brought up and educated in a time when a UK education was the envy of the world, I never thought I would live to see this day - I am ashamed for my country!

Ed-you-Kay-shun? Ed-you-Kay-shun? Ed-you-Kay-shun? Get it? No, despite all that never-ending spin, it seems too few kids do these days! And that point needs to be Laboured!

In an attempt to hide their shame the government has tried to belittle the tests and performance tables which are a part of the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment, however as they are the same criteria praised by Tony Blair in 2000 as being evidence of how well we were doing at that time, there is little credibility being given to their arguments. Of course, those 2000 results would have been based on a time only a couple of years after a Conservative government, so therefore much of Labour's interference with their damaging policies would not have had time to filter through the system, take affect, and become apparent. Whoops! Get out of that one, Gordon Brown. With apologies to the late and great Laurel & Hardy: that's another fine mess Tony has got you into!

Another day, another disaster, and yet another apology having to be begrudgingly spluttered out by the sorry bunch we, for whatever reason, still call our government and not the Crazy Gang. This one, following the Royal Air Force Board of Inquiry report, by Des Browne the Defence Secretary to the families of the 14 who died as a result of the 37-year-old reconnaissance plane exploding over Afghanistan last year when leaking fuel ignited moments after mid-air refuelling - probably, it is thought, because the recommended fire suppression system had not been fitted to the aircraft. The Nimrod, a museum piece yet an aircraft so vital to the war, is only still flying because as part of a package of cuts its replacement was delayed - so this report by the Board of Inquiry goes a long way in giving credence to all those vociferous military chiefs' complaints of a lack of funding.

The government can, and often do in an effort to convince us they are providing adequate funding, produce figures to show they have increased the money allocated to the Armed Forces year on year, however what they don't like to admit, or perhaps are too incompetent to appreciate, is that these increases are on an already severely cut defence budget - one that was something like halved years ago in tune with the more peaceful times. Since those happy days we have entered into two lengthy conflicts, and our commitments have magnified to breaking point - and all without even reinstating the original budget of yesteryear. The increases we are being told of today, when seen in those real terms, become plainly pitiful!

It seems neither Gordon Brown nor his predecessor, or anyone in the present government, has realised that the minute a country declares war or enters into a military conflict, if it really means business and wishes to avoid prolonging the action, it needs to write a blank cheque for its Armed Forces. When our lads and lasses are putting their lives on the line for us they must have EVERYTHING they need to do the job we ask of them as safely, as quickly, and as efficiently as is possible. To provide them with anything less is criminal, and to my mind today we have a government of criminals. Our engagements in both Afghanistan and Iraq have been plagued throughout by stories of a lack of equipment and resources.

These stories have not gone away. Far from it, many have been substantiated by investigative journalism and television documentaries. I doubt I was alone in feeling ashamed of my country when at one point in the Iraq conflict it was revealed on a television documentary that it was only possible to have just one creaky, old Nimrod aircraft in operation as all the rest, having been cannibalised to keep that one airborne, were grounded. Talk about going to war on a shoestring! Our military lads and lasses have been performing miracles! But perhaps I shouldn't have said that, it might encourage the government to ask them to walk on water to get to the next conflict - and there goes our navy!

Our troops have enough to do fighting the enemy, they should not at the same time have to fight their government for rifles that do not jam, suitable field weapons and the ammunition for them, enough flak jackets to go round, the correct camouflage, the (available) technology to protect them against roadside bombs, enough helicopters (embarrassingly, in Afghanistan there are stories we had to borrow some from other nations!), reconnaissance and attack aircraft, and all the other many items they need, but which have not been readily provided or are easily obtainable.

If anyone should think these are all acceptable situations for our service personnel to suffer and overcome, I beg to differ!

Finally, the Times newspaper's revelation that it has found more than a 100 websites offering for sale the fullest details of many thousands of the UK's bank accounts, including those of a High Court Judge, with some of the rogues even providing "free samples" to whet the appetite, is nothing short of frightening. The newspaper claims it was able to download the banking information of 32 individuals for free. Apparently one of the sites has 30,000 British credit card numbers for sale for as little as £1 each - which, as serious as this is, posed a comical question for me: how would anyone buy them? Few would be silly enough to pay for them with their Visa, would they?

Strangely nobody has attempted to link this data with either the widely reported two discs recently lost by HM Revenue and Customs, or the subsequently learned about but less widely reported others - those of an unknown quantity and length of time missing, but which apparently contain similar unencrypted information, and have been similarly "misplaced" by different governmental departments.

As if all this potentially damaging and confidential information being for sale on the internet isn't bad enough, perhaps equally as frightening is the spokesman for Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner. After confirming the data these websites are offering appears to be for currently active accounts, this person went on to explain that if it had been acquired fraudulently, or by theft, the matter would be passed on to the police as a criminal inquiry. Hmm . . . Really? That is considerate of them!

Now I don't class myself as a simpleton, but maybe I should for I cannot for the life of me think of a way in which these details that are subject to all the laws on privacy could appear openly for sale on a public website without an infringement of some law occurring somewhere along the line. Why does the Information Commission want to waste time looking to see if fraud or theft has been involved when so obviously the police should be brought in immediately in an attempt to protect the British people, their personal identities, and their money? Do they intend sitting on this for months, scratching their heads and throwing their hands in the air as people's bank accounts are emptied? Am I missing something here?

I shall just have to hope it is not soon going to be the Royal Mews millions, won't I? With difficulty, I suppose one possibly could learn how to survive without having a batman - but without an occasional Robin? Have a heart - the weeks would feel unbearably long!

Holy abstentions!

"The Bitch!" 6/12/07.

The Mike Huckabee Factor

by: Tania Gabrielle



I know it’s been Oprah’s big weekend foray into politics. But there’s another story that’s brewing. And its effect will probably eclipse Oprah very soon.

I’m talking about Mike Huckabee. A friend asked me about him a couple of months ago. Not knowing who he was, I did the numbers. Then I told my friend, ‘watch out for this man. He’s going to go far.’

Since that day I’ve kept an eye on Huckabee. He’s fulfilling his promise fast. Unusually fast. Two weeks ago polls put him in 5th place in South Carolina. Now he’s leading. Without ever placing a television ad. You may think the Republican race is unpredictable from day to day. And that everything is still up for grabs.

Well, wait til you hear about Huckabee’s numbers before assuming it’s a free-for-all.

Mike Huckabee’s name, an unforgettable one, adds up to 14/5 - the Media Number. Watch out when a candidate has this number. Yes, it took a little time before he made national news, but once people SAW him, they LIKED him. This is what the number 14/5 does. It endears you to the person you’re seeing and hearing on radio, TV and the internet.

With a 14 name, Huckabee’s magnetic communication with the public will even outweigh his message. Meaning, there will be many people who agree with some of what he stands for - but the main reason they’re going to vote for him is entirely instinctual. They’re having a strong gut reaction to his voice and his demanor. He is genuine. He’s funny. He’s got the magnetic personality of a bygone star.

The 14/5 Media Number also gives him the freedom to not always tote the party line. Huckabee’s willingness to break with certain long-held views and stick to his own guns, makes him even more appealing.

And what about those debates. His 14 name is crucial for those as well, enabling him to come out on top, because of his endearing and humorous communication skills.

Huckabee’s day of birth, 24/6, adds to his fortune. Here again he has another highly magnetic vibration. 24 ensures an effortless flow in life – everything is easily attainable. Additionally, 6 represents the ‘cosmic parent.’ Huckabee’s folksy, down home style makes him someone you want to get to know – and invite home for dinner.

These two numbers, 14 and 24, are vital to his campaign.

In fact, going into the holidays, when campaigns go on hiatus, Huckabee is in the middle of an out-of-left-field surge in key states. Due to the suddenness of his rising popularity, he’s more unscathed than other Republicans. With his 14/5 name, he’ll emerge back in January in full force.

And I haven’t even talked about his currently active numbers. Believe me, they are good. So is his Life Purpose Number. In fact, ALL are going to be in full force next year. 2008 is a Personal Year of amazing synchronicities for Huckabee.

2008 is shaping up to be a big year for you as well. It happens to add up to a 10 – the number of Instant Manifestation. So it’s very, very important for you to know how your own personal numbers are lining up next year. Because you will manifest everything easily – good or bad.

And because there’s an 8 in 2008, a big subject for you will be all things related to monee and abundance. Get your personal blueprint now at http://www.taniagabrielle.com

As for the other Presidential Candidates, both Democrats and Republicans, I’ll be revealing their numerology success quotient very soon.

Thursday, December 13, 2007

'Marketing MBA better than finance MBA'

discussion and received a barrage of responses from Get Ahead readers.

Some vouched for marketing, some for finance, some sat on the fence, others had off-beat perspectives to offer.

Here are some examples:

I believe marketing is important and more critical than finance in any business activity. Even the success of financial services (like banking and insurance) and products like loans and credit cards are dependent on how well they are marketed as there is not much difference in the interest rates and charges.
We can see how certain new generation banks like ICICI have succeeded in their marketing programmes. Though one cannot undermine the importance of finance, it is marketing that is essential for the success of any business enterprise.
As for job opportunities, the initial jobs are almost equally good in both streams. As one gets more experience, senior positions in finance generally demand additional professional qualifications like CA, CS, ICWAI and CFA. In the case of marketing, experience and results matter -- not additional qualifications.
-- K Srinivas, BITS Pilani, 1995

The big debate is not which one is better; it should be: what is the aptitude of the candidate? People who have an eye for detail and are research-oriented can go for a finance MBA, while those who have excellent communication skills and have an outgoing personality should opt for marketing.

The best choice according to me is neither finance nor marketing -- it should HR!
With an increased focus on people issues, HR guys have everything going for them. It is a fact that entry level jobs in HR are pathetic but, after two or three years in the profession, one will find enough opportunities. There is an ever increasing demand for experienced HR professionals.
In fact, in the long run, they have much higher compensation levels/ better positions in management as compared to either marketing or finance.

What are the qualities one should have to make it big in HR? One would obviously need patience and perseverance. Someone who is passionate about resolving people issues will be the right candidate for pursuing a career in HR.
-- Raghav Rao, chief editor, HRudaya (montly e-zine by HRinIndia)

I think a holistic business perspective comes from exposure to all areas -- finance, marketing, operations, strategy, etc.

I guess this is why learning is so comprehensive in those business schools where there is no rigid classification of subject areas into 'majors' and 'minors'. I think a B-school participant should get a chance to pick and choose subjects from different areas (finance, marketing, etc) and get an ideal mix for himself/ herself.

As they say, the big picture matters the most. The added advantage of having a balanced mix of electives is that one has the option to evaluate and choose from a diverse range of career options (say from FMCG sales to I-Banking).

One last thing -- I think this debate should also include systems as an option -- it should be finance vs marketing vs systems. Now, that would really motivate the systems guys to pour in their thoughts.

-- Anupam, IIM Indore, class of 2005. Currently assistant manager, CRM & Analystics, Mahindra British Telecom

The question is not 'which is better', but 'which is more popular'. The reason behind this is that the relative value of each MBA changes according to the type of market and its condition.

Is finance better than marketing? The answer is yes and no, as finance seems a better option in today's situation where the stock market is optimistic.

Finance people -- the bean counters, as they are called -- are viewed as pessimists. They will always tell you why the company should NOT go for the proposed plans. On the other hand, the marketing people -- the optimists -- will have no doubts about the success of these plans.

Hence, it's not strange that we always see F and M people coming out of meetings fighting with each other. But the moment one doubts (as F people do) a well-planned step (which F people have), one is out of the market.

To drive home my point, in many a monopolistic and cost-driven market, the sharpest tool is finance. However, one should not forget every effort is being made all over the world to have competitive markets by restructuring these monopolistic markets (the electricity market in India, for example). So the name of the game is marketing rather than finance.

Every wannabe manager should keep in mind that an MBA in finance gives you the tools to analyse and expand your market, but not the marketing skills and tactics necessary for increasing your output.

Are you listening guys? The 'mind game' is going to stay, not 'mind calculation'.

-- Niraj Kumar, MBA -- Power Management. Currently with NPTI.

I don't think there is a need to have a debate on which specialisation is the best. Why forgot they both are part of management and hold different functions and styles without which nothing will work?

As for the clearer picture, one also needs to consider the thumb rule while getting a job -- what your ambitions are and what you have to do when choosing a specialisation.

The MBA you choose should also depend on your personal ability. If you are good at number-crunching, have a flair for juggling numbers and think you can manage the party well, then finance is the job for you. If you are creative and have a zeal to sell, then there's no doubt you should be in marketing. So you have to really assess yourself before you decide on your specialisation.

As far as the pay packet is concerned, it all really depends on whom you work for. If you are working for an Indian firm, chances are you would earn a little less than your counterpart at an MNC. But, again, that depends on the size of the company and your designation.

http://www.rediff.com/getahead/2005/jul/14mba.htm

MBA Articles

GMAT

Five Reasons for taking GMAT
Do GMAT Scores and Grades deserve all the attention that they do?
What to do in schools while preparing for MBA?
GAMT eve – Aiming for top scores
The GMAT Essay
Reasons to sit for GMAT during summers


MBA Application and B-schools

The MBA Application – An Overview
Common questions about Cover Letter
E-mail Cover letter etiquette
Open the window of opportunity with a cover letter
Resume Advice
Resumes that work for you
Selling your career change
The job interview
Like nobody's business (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Career development - part of the curriculum (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Business schools battle to be more international (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Applying to business schools - a question of timings (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
‘If you want your application to the business school stand out; first do your homework properly, and then apply early' (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
The MBA – a passport to an international career (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Global 100 top business schools (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)


MBA Programs

MBA – The right choice
Are you ready for an MBA?
Right age to do an MBA
What to do in college while preparing for an MBA?
Which MBA Program should you choose?
Executive MBA Program
Are you considering an Executive MBA?
Pick wisely between Executive MBA and Executive Education
How to choose the best EMBA program?
Should you choose an International MBA?
There are other types of MBA
Non-profit MBAs
Your MBA – One year or two (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Home or abroad? MBA Study options around the world (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Vive la difference - doing your MBA in France (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Five steps for choosing the right business school (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Corporate social responsibility – a mandate for MBA (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Broadening your business education (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
MBA improves management skills by over 30% (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
FRAQs (‘Fraid to ask questions) for potential MBAs (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
The first steps to taking an MBA (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Accountancy, management and economics (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Engineers and MBAs (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Enterprise and MBAs (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Masters of the universe? (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)


MBA – Finance and Scholarships


Financing your MBA (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
The scholarship option (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
How do you finance your MBA? (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
MBAs are sound investment – and not just from the best known schools (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
MBA qualification – A passport to a life overseas! (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Millions of dollars of unclaimed scholarships for MBA study (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)


MBA Careers


MBA Careers - I
MBA Careers – II
Careers switchers benefit from strong MBA demand (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Regional MBA Recruitment – What's happening around the world? (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
The careers stepping stone (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Top MBA Careers – Jobs, networking and careers development for MBA (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Back to basics – What an MBA could really mean to you? (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Top MBA Careers (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)


MBA Career Advice


The X-factors – The skills MBA Recruiters want (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
The Executive Option (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
A guide through the interview minefield – Commonly asked questions (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Network, network, network (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
MBA recruitment on the rise (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)


MBA Recruitments


MBA Recruitments – The upswing has started (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Regional MBA Recruitment - What's happening around the world? (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Trends in MBA recruitments by sector (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Job marketing is improving for MBAs (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Careers switchers benefit from broad based recovery (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
MBA recruitment back on track to global MBAs (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
MBA Specializations – an oxymoron? (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Recruitment hotspot (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)


MBA Salaries


MBA salaries around the world (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
MBA compensation heading for a new peak (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)


B-Schools

Business Schools Admissions
Finding the best B-Schools for you
Finding the right B-Schools for you
International B-schools – What is so great about them?
Leadership – MBA lexicon top of the tops
Magic formula for getting into a B-school
The B-school reality check
U-turn to school
Study tips
What are the B-schools looking for?
What is life at B-school?
What's the B-school education like?
Work Experience – No green horns, only work-ex counts


B-School Rankings

Understanding Business school rankings (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Accreditation of Business Schools – Does it matter? (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
To rank or not to rank? (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)


Special Features

W-MBA: Woman's approach to an MBA
Women and B-school: Breaking the B-school Gender barriers
Women in business – the changing face of corporate management (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Meeting the diversity challenge (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Making leaders (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
The ‘Vision' thing (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
The next big thing (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Managing in a global economy – the importance of workplace diversity (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
The mainstreaming of corporate social responsibility (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Diversity matters! (Courtesy: Qs TOP MBA)
Diversity for leadership (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)
Growth of the MBA education (Courtesy: QS TOP MBA)

Financing your MBA

Resigning from a secure job, moving country, even leaving behind family and friends; potential MBAs seem to take such obstacles in their stride. But with programmes at top-flight school now costing as much as US $75,000, one question seems to occupy business school applicants more than any other: just how can I find the money to pay for my education?

Every year, TopMBA surveys nearly 4000 aspiring MBAs around the world to establish whether finance is likely to prove a barrier to study. The latest survey found that most had already looked seriously into how they would fund business school. A wide variety of methods were cited, from scholarships to personal loans. Worldwide, 74% of respondents favoured scholarships. Next came a student’s own savings at 68% followed by some form of external loan at 61%. Overall, only 28% expected to get financial help from their employer.

Favoured funding methods vary considerably from area to area. Help from family and friends appears to be most common in the Asia-Pacific region, where it was cited by 48% of those questioned, contrasting with 43% in the USA and Western Europe. Personal loans were the preferred source for over 81% of US students, but for fewer than 57% of those from Latin America. Company sponsorship was expected by 36% of respondents in the Middle East and Africa, but by only 21% of those in Latin America. Own savings were the favoured method for 80% of Western European candidates, but for only 62% of those from the Middle East and Africa.

However, whatever a student’s initial preference, in practice, the most common source of finance is now the education or career loan. We look at some of the sources of such loans across the globe.

Selected sources of MBA Finance around the world
UK

UK citizens can borrow up to two thirds of their pre-study salary in any twelve-month period from NatWest to fund an MBA. Applicants need to contribute at least 20% of the course fees from their own resources and repayment periods range from 7 years for sums under £20,000 to 10 years for sums over £20,000. Interest is currently 6.9% APR. HSBC offers loans to students of a number of British based schools, including Cranfield, London Business School and Manchester Business School. Unlike many other schemes, this facility is open to students from anywhere in the world. Interest is charged at 2% over HSBC’s base rate for the duration of the loan. There are no upfront commissions or early repayment charges.

USA

There are several sources of aid for US students studying at home or abroad and for overseas candidates looking to study in the USA. These include:

Citibank has a very well developed student loan division, which provides standard loans and also partners with individual schools to provide tailored packages. The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, for example, offers funding through Citibank, which guarantees most accepted students a prime plus 0.5% interest rate, with a 15-year payback period, and no co-signers or credit check required. www.citibank.com

IEFC – Students interested in studying at one of nearly 400 institutions around the world may be eligible for loans of up to US $45,000 from the IEFC (International Education Finance Corporation). The IEFC has three loan programs: the Stafford for US citizens or permanent residents, Can HELP for Canadians and ISLP for foreign students. To be eligible for ISLP you must be able to provide a guarantor, who is a US citizen or permanent resident. www.iefc.com

GATE Universal is a student loan program managed by First Marblehead Corporation and Bank of America. www.gateloan.com

MBA LOANS is a private loan program run by Sallie Mae and targeted specifically at US citizens. www.salliemae.com

Austria

CA-Post-Graduate, Creditanstalt offers some loans. www.creditanstalt.co.at

France
French residents of any nationality who have worked in the country can apply to FONGECIF (Fonds de Gestion du Congé Individuel de Formation) for up to 90% funding of tuition fees plus a part of their current salary. www.emse.fr/ASI/AIDES/fongecif.htmlGermany

Since 2001, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research has offered a low interest (currently 3.3%) loan of € 7,200 to all graduate students seeking to study in Germany. www.bmbf.de

Certain banks also provide MBA loans. EU students on the MBA programme at HHL-Leipzig, for example, are eligible for loans from Sparkasse Leipzig at 5%, while potential MBAs from the EU, USA and Canada can also apply for funding via the HHL’s partner, CareerConcept .www.hhl.de

Italy

Banca Commerciale Italiana offers MBA loans for Italian nationals.

Spain

Several of the key Spanish schools have negotiated loan agreements with Spanish and overseas banks to help students with funding. IESE, Barcelona has a loan scheme offered through Banco Santander Centro Hispano, which is open to students of any nationality accepted by the school. Instituto de Empresa, Madrid has similar arrangements to cover fees and iving expenses with repayment periods up to eight years.

Russia

Banque Société Générale Vostok offers loans to Russian citizens to help with MBA study, either at home or abroad. Students can postpone repayment (though not interest) until up to 24 months after graduation. www.bsgv.ru

Latin America

The Organisation of American States (OAS) provides a wide range of financing options for nationals of member states to study for masters degrees both in and outside Latin America. For further information or assistance, candidates should contact the National Liaison Office (ONE) of their country of origin, the appropriate office of the General Secretariat of the OAS or the Educational Portal of the Americas.

Financial institutions in several of the region’s major countries also provide loans geared to the needs of MBA students.

Mexico

FIDERH – provides loans of up to MXN158,500 per annum to cover tuition fees and living expenses. Candidates need to hold a first degree, be aged under 30 and be able to supply a guarantor of Mexican nationality, who owns a property with a value of at least 150% the loan amount. www.fiderh.org.mx

Fundación Healy provides loans and scholarships for residents of Sonora or Baja California. www.fundacionhealy.org

Peru

Banco de Credito offers loans of up to US$50,000 to cover the cost of an MBA and up to US$20,000 towards living expenses. www.bcp.com.pe

Australia

Through its partnership with ANZ Bank, AGSM can provide access to credit for MBA fees and living expenses for permanent Australian and New Zealand residents. Repayments are deferred and eligibility is based on 70% of earnings over the previous 12 months. The Commonwealth Bank of Australia does not have a specific student loan programme, but will consider applications on individual merit up to AU$5,000 at branch level. Head office considers higher amounts.

India

Indian nationals have access to a wide range of educational loans geared to fund MBA study. Key suppliers include State Bank of India, Allahabad Bank, State Bank of Mysore, Bank of Baroda and the Industrial Development Bank of India. Loans can be used to cover the cost of fees, travel to an overseas school, the cost of books, computers, etc and living expenses. In most cases, candidates will already need to have secured a place at a recognised institution and may need to supply a guarantor, such as a parent or close relative, with sufficient funds to cover the loan. Repayment ranges up to four years after graduation and interest rates are currently around 8.5 to 8.75%.

Canada

Domestic students at the Rotman School of Management in Toronto can access interest-subsidised loans from Scotiabank to cover the full cost of their tuition. Each provincial government in Canada also administers and maintains a student financial aid program in cooperation with the federal government's Canada Student Loan Program. Eligibility requirements, maximum borrowing amounts and loan repayment policies vary from province to province. Usually, assistance is in the form of interest free loans while a student is in school, although some provinces award grants to students or offer additional assistance to students graduating with debt over a certain amount. http://osap.gov.on.ca.