The Nomad and the Olive Branch

It is not new to see on the television screen a man or a woman in a tight suit speak "on behalf" of the "people", stating promises and chanting slogans to rile the masses before them to support their transitions to power. The world, however, changes for them once they get comfortable in the leather chairs of their presidential offices. They are swamped with the demands of lobbyists and the common people, and are held ambivalent over what pacifies the rage of the common man and what betters the common man's socioeconomic status in light of an improving nation (both of them mutually exclusive concepts). Consider, however, that voters for a particular politician who aligns himself/herself with a particular political affiliation tend to support the campaigned ideology. Yet, politicians are still stuck in the aforementioned quagmire, even in the light of scenarios which can not be solved at the time being by promoting a certain economic or social system or belief. Fo

I apologize for not posting as of late, and I know this topic is way out of date now. Life has a tendency of getting in the way of less important endeavors like blogging, not to say that what I'm about to address is of little significance compared to living your daily routine day by day. Considering what is going on these days, I'm sure you'd be surprised as to why I am posting this now as opposed to day it started. Well, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls... I'm back, and what I'm about to say and show you is not pretty, nor for the faint of heart, if you know what I mean. Last January, the Gaza Strip, an area no larger than Washington, D.C. and populated by 1.5 million Palestinians of whom at least 80% live below the poverty line and can not sustain or transport themselves [ 1 ], has been under attack by the Israeli army. The casualties number in at least 1,000 Gazans killed, mostly civilians and roughly half of the total being children [ 2 ]. Since the conflict

DISCLAIMER: This topic is not against the nature or necessity of a military force. This topic addresses a disturbing social and political phenomenon that absolves armies from the same accountability that applies to every armed group. But then again, this world isn't a just and fair place. Moreover, take note that I do not support nor condone any military, militant group, or insurgent organization, nor any actions which - BS semantics aside - are clearly unjustifiable. Lastly, before you read on, I acknowledge my biases for "underdogs". This bias, however, does not detract from the gist of the topic itself. After surfing over several political forums, mainly "politicalcrossfire.com" (where, as many of you might already know, I post occasionally), I've come across a rather disturbing trend. There is a prevalent notion that the military of a nation is somehow above the law and for some reason does not have the ability to commit acts of terrorism or war crimes.

The First World War was one of the costliest wars if not the costliest war in the last two millennia. Both Allied and Central powers lost much in terms of manpower, military strength, production capability, and economic stability. [1] Given historical tensions between Germany and France dating back to the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, the French leadership saw an opportunity in the end of the war to weaken Germany vis-à-vis the Versailles Treaty of 1919, the WWI postwar settlement. [2] The original stipulations of the Versailles Treaty were designed to weaken Germany militarily, politically, and economically to ensure that it was not strong enough to attack France or its neighbors. Such conditions included demilitarization of areas such as the Rhineland or the Saar Valley, limitations on the size of the German military, monetary reparations, and loss of territory. [3] British Prime Minister Lloyd George, American President Woodrow Wilson, and the new German Weimar government, among o

Download and install Audacity 1.2.6 from its Sourceforge mirror. If you wish to export the karaoke tracks as .mp3 files, download the LAME encoder from the same download mirror. Run Audacity 1.2.6, choose “File”, click “Open”, and select the desired audio file from your music library. When the file is finished loading, click on the audio track’s option menu on the left of the wave pattern and choose “Split Stereo Track”. Ensure that the track is not playing in Audacity or any other program. Select the right stereo channel, usually the one on the bottom, and invert the track by using the “Invert” effect from the “Effects” menu. Change the track types of both right and left channels to “mono”. Play the track. If the track is satisfactory, go to the “File” menu and export the track as .mp3 or .wav. Choose a name different from the original file. Should this guide fail you, search for cheesy instructional videos on YouTube or find a $59.99 karaoke maker program from the web. Upload the fil

Music is classified into many genres (rock, pop, rap, etc.) and subgenres (classic rock, heavy metal, hiphop, soul, etc.). It has worked mainly to classify different tastes and musical movements. Recently, however, the upper echelon of the Western music industries have come up with a fancy term for anything else that doesn't fall into these categories: "world music," an umbrella phrase that shrouds Arabic, Latin, Hindi, Greek, Carribean, and other genres (sorry if I left anyone out, but I just included these for the sake of example). The phrase "World music" is the biggest crock of BS I have ever come across as one who has a taste in a variety of musical genres (albeit admittedly over a limited scope of artists). It is a demeaning and racist term used to shove aside any and all interest in a wider spectrum of musical tastes, regardless of whether or not they conform to some standard of musical creation, such as classical or baroque music, or some form of diction

I know this story is long overdue, and that I haven't been writing in a while. There are more things to life than sitting in front of a computer and rambling about whatever comes your way in the news or your daily experiences. But anyways, to the issue at hand. Last year on December the 14th, Muntazer al-Zaidi, an Iraqi reporter from the Iraqi-owned and Egyptian-based Al-Baghdadia TV (البغدادية), threw 2 "size 10" shoes (according to Dubya) at the then pResident of the U.S., George W. Bush ( 1 ). All Dubya could do was smile at Zaidi, who was then assailed by Iraqi security forces and taken into custody. Of course, that was all said and done at the time, and usually at other events involving political figures being assailed one way or another by angry protestors, the news of such things tends to die off or remain in memory as an event alone. Of course, that's for most events of this theme. Sadly, Western - and unfortunately this time around, Arab - media outlets have