| Friday,
October 21, 2005
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1829289,00.html
The TimesOctober 17, 2005
Two wheels: good. Two legs: terrorist suspect
By David Lister, Scotland Correspondent
WITH her year-round tan, long blonde hair and
designer clothes, Sally Cameron does not look like a threat to national
security.
But the 34-year-old property developer has
joined the ranks of Britain's most unlikely terrorist suspects after being
held for hours for trespassing on a cycle path.
Ms Cameron was being hailed yesterday as
Scotland's answer to Walter Wolfgang, the 82-year-old heckler manhandled out
of the Labour Party conference last month. She was arrested under the
Terrorism Act for walking along a cycle path in the harbour area of Dundee.
Yesterday, after receiving a letter from the
Tayside procurator fiscal's office informing her that she would not be
prosecuted, Ms Cameron said: "It is utterly ridiculous that such an
inoffensive person as myself should be subject to such heavy-handed
treatment."
She was walking from her office in Dundee to
her home in the suburb of Broughty Ferry when she was arrested under new
anti-terrorist legislation and held for four hours.
She said: "I've been walking to work every
morning for months and months to keep fit. One day, I was told by a guard on
the gate that I couldn't use the route any more because it was solely a
cycle path and he said, if I was caught doing it again, I'd be arrested.
"The next thing I knew, the harbour master had
driven up behind me with a megaphone, saying, 'You're trespassing, please
turn back'. It was totally ridiculous. I started laughing and kept on
walking. Cyclists going past were also laughing.
"But then two police cars roared up beside me
and cut me off, like a scene from Starsky and Hutch, and officers told me I
was being arrested under the Terrorism Act. The harbour master was waffling
on and (saying that), because of September 11, I would be arrested and
charged."
Ms Cameron, who said that at one stage one of
the officers asked her to stop laughing, described the incident as "like a
scene from the movie Erin Brockovich, with all the dock workers cheering me
and telling me to give them hell". She said: "I was told that the cycle path
was for cyclists only, as if walkers and not cyclists were the only ones
likely to plant bombs.
There are no signs anywhere saying there are to
be no pedestrians.
"They took me to the police station and held me
for several hours before charging me and releasing me."
She said that she was particularly galled by
the letter from the procurator fiscal's office, which said that she would
not be prosecuted even though "the evidence is sufficient to justify
bringing you before the court on this criminal charge".
Keith Berry, the harbour master at Forth Ports
Dundee, said yesterday that Ms Cameron had been seen as a "security risk".
Speaking about the incident, which took place in May, he said: "We contacted
the police in regards to this matter because the woman was in a secure area
which forbids people walking. It was seen as a security risk. We were
following guidelines in requirement with the port security plan set up by
the Government."
A spokesman for Forth Ports said: "We will
robustly prosecute anyone who breaches these new security measures because
they have been introduced by the Government and we are obliged to enforce
them."
=========
Subject: The ways of Empire
Just up on google news:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002571833_afgan20.html
Looks like we're learning the ways of empire whether
we want to or not. :-(
-David Mercer
==============
Principal Brought Rapid Results To Unsung School.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/
article/2005/10/19/AR2005101900774_pf.html
--- Roland Dobbins
===========
Good overview of Google Maps applications.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/20/technology/circuits/20maps.html
-- Roland Dobbins
=============
SPS.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/20/technology/
circuits/20maps.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1129875659
-hjSimJwEJy4Ykmjo9Cfquw
- Roland Dobbins
Tesla knew his stuff...
Jerry,
The link you included with this article is the same as
the article above it (about Google maps) SPS. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/20/technology/
<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/20/technology/circuits/20maps.html?adxnn
l=1&adxnnlx=1129875659-hjSimJwEJy4Ykmjo9Cfquw>
circuits/20maps.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1129875659 <http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/20/technology/circuits/20maps.html?adxnn
l=1&adxnnlx=1129875659-hjSimJwEJy4Ykmjo9Cfquw> -hjSimJwEJy4Ykmjo9Cfquw
<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/20/technology/circuits/20maps.html?adxnn
l=1&adxnnlx=1129875659-hjSimJwEJy4Ykmjo9Cfquw> - Roland Dobbins Tesla knew
his stuff...
I think the link you wanted was (Tesla and SPS):
http://tech2.nytimes.com/mem/technology/techreview.html
?res=9403E6DF1439F935A35752C1A9659C8B63
-- Cecil Rose
============
Subject: Iraq: Learning the Lessons of Vietnam
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20051101faessay84604
-p0/melvin-r-laird/iraq-learning-the-lessons-of-vietnam.html
Iraq: Learning the Lessons of Vietnam Melvin R. Laird
<http://www.foreignaffairs.org/author/melvin-r-laird/index.html>
From Foreign Affairs, November/December 2005 <http://www.foreignaffairs.org/2005/6.html>
Summary: During Richard Nixon's first term, when I
served as secretary of defense, we withdrew most U.S. forces from Vietnam
while building up the South's ability to defend itself. The result was a
success -- until Congress snatched defeat from the jaws of victory by
cutting off funding for our ally in 1975. Washington should follow a similar
strategy now, but this time finish the job properly.
MELVIN R. LAIRD was Secretary of Defense from 1969 to
1973, Counselor to the President for Domestic Affairs from 1973 to 1974, and
a member of the House of Representatives from 1952 to 1969.
KEG
=============
I work for Google.
http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2005/10/i_work_for_goog.php
---- Roland Dobbins
===========
A number of
letters on a theme:
Subj: The usefulness of colleges
... and of Harvard in particular, specifically to Bill
Gates:
1. Harvard provided the computer on which Gates stole
the computer time he used to develop Altair BASIC.
2. Harvard is where he met Ballmer.
Would Microsoft exist without at least #1 above?
Esther Dyson understood, as I did not, that the real
advantage to be achieved from going to Harvard is the connections you can
form with the going-to-be-rich-and-powerful. But I don't feel too bad about
that: evidently her father didn't understand it either.
And _The Bell Curve_ discusses the role of colleges as
mate-finding services.
So colleges in general, and Harvard in particular,
aren't quite useless, even aside from their credential-awarding service.
On the other hand, one wonders whether the barriers to
entry for prospective competitors for these useful services are quite so
high as they have been historically. Certainly there are cheaper and easier
places for a startup software shop to find computer time. 8-)
As for why college education costs more every year:
high barriers to entry for new competitors, no?
Rod Montgomery==monty@sprintmail.com
==============
Subject: Frills?
Jerry:
From my personal experience, mostly from my social
group at college, there is a very clear delineation:
Individuals who had chosen a professional course
(physics, chemistry, computer science, education) have prospered to the
limits of their abilities or perhaps a bit beyond. Three of us are a
successful senior computer specialist for NASA, a senior chemist at an
industrial chemistry facility who spends at least 4 months a year servicing
clients in Japan and South America, and a physicist who took an advanced
degree and who has enjoyed modest success in several notably different
specialty areas of physics, mathematics, and chemistry.
Individuals who had chosen a "fine arts" or "liberal
arts" course are generally working secretarial or clerical positions at
wages not much better than entry level wages.
There have been and always will be people who benefit
from higher education, just as there are many for whom higher education is a
playground between high school and the real world.
Ultimately, success has two contributors, ability and
industry (in the sense of hard work). Mr. Gates and Mr. Dell were famously
able to succeed without completing their higher education due to selection
of a field where, frankly, fairly easily acquired skills were used
intelligently, and with great industry, to achieve dramatic results.
Whereas, for example, my career path has been one of constant retraining
while building on the base of past experience and skills. I can play the
money game to some extent (critical for achieving commercial success) but
prefer the more abstract technical challenges and let the money fall where
it will.
J.
=================
Subject: College Education Costs
"Is there any sane reason why college education costs
more every year? Other than silliness, frills, and Political Correctness?"
Supply and demand. The demand in America continues to
exceed the supply of quality courses, which is essentially limited by the
availability of competent teachers. Here in the UK, with costs capped, we
see more and more qualified students failing to find a university place.
-- "The data (or the marks when teaching) are
sacrosanct--they tell us what actually happened."
Harry Erwin, PhD http://osiris.sunderland.ac.uk/~cs0her
==================
Subject: Is college worth the cost?
Jerry, you asked: ``Is there any sane reason why
college education costs more every year?''
There is certainly a reason, though I won't make a
judgement on whether it's sane.
Each family has some reservation price, $X, which they
are willing to spend on a college education for their kid. They won't go
beyond that. The colleges have learned to practice what economists call
``perfect price discrimination'', charging pretty close to that reservation
price for each family. Poor families generally get charged less than rich
families, dumb kids (who probably wouldn't get far in the world without the
education) get charged more on average than smart kids (who will do just
fine no matter what).
Congress noticed that the sticker cost of education
(which few actually paid) was too high for the disadvantaged, so they made
extra funds available for college costs. Through subsidised loans and
grants, they made $Y available, so that now each family has $X+$Y as its
reservation price. Colleges quickly figured this out, and raised their
prices to match. Thus, one of the big factors driving the cost of college is
financial aid.
Unfortunately, college isn't getting better as it gets
more expensive. First, we have the fact that most of education takes place
between a student, a book and a mentor. That's pretty cheap, except for the
student's opportunity cost, and it isn't aided by throwing more money at it.
Second, we have the fact that most of the money doesn't go into instruction
and facilities for instruction. Colleges are run by and for the
administrators, and the faculty and students are generally tolerated as the
unfortunately necessary administratees. Some of this extra administration is
simple bureaucracy, but much of it, perhaps most of it, is to deal with the
paperwork imposed by federally funded political correctness. Colleges have
to show that they're giving equal resources to women's intramural teams,
have to show that they're not discriminating against minorities, and on and
on. The cost of not doing so would be to forgo the federal funds, and go
back to the old, low-cost model of ``a student, a mentor, and a book''. No
administrator is going to give up his bureaucratic empire do that.
So, is a college education worth the money? I suspect
that it's not worth the $X+$Y that society is spending on it. It may be
worth the $X that the individual family spends.
I have spent 10 years in college, and have annexed a
master's degree in statistics and a BS in electrical engineering. Had I
finished my dissertation, I would have a Ph.D in economics. I still regret
not taking a tool and die maker apprenticeship I was offered when I was 19:
it would have given me higher lifetime earnings, and would have been very
satisfying work. I will help my kids with college if they want it, but I
won't push them into it, and I would discourage them from going into debt
(as I have!) to get a diploma. I will push them to learn a trade, whatever
they choose to do about college.
Nels Tomlinson
I would argue that in 1954 I
got a better education at the University of Iowa, for tuition I could afford
with the GI Bill, than most get at the Ivy League schools today for ever
increasing costs. We allow the universities including the state schools to
add imbecile stuff like Black and Women's studies departments, expanding
sociology departments, more voodoo sciences, with great and greater costs so
that one graduates deeply in debt. And "accreditation" is not given to
practical schools with reasonable curricula, few frills, and lots of actual
education. And this will continue.
======
Hi Jerry.
This was partially prompted by the "Is Higher
Education Worth the Cost?" message by Jim in Thursday, October 20th's Mail,
particularly the line:
"The surge in GDP/capita that resulted from us Boomers
entering the workforce and therefore ceasing to be dependents of our
parents, fortified by our having few kids, much later, enabled higher
education to be larded with all sorts of time-and-money sinks..."
It seems to me that perhaps the proliferation of
higher education, these "time-and-money sinks", and perhaps even
no-child-left-behind schools has skewed the supply/demand relationship
between workers and employers. Not all, but most employers blindly rely on
our current education system to train their future workers without bothering
to influence the type of education that is needed. The result is (at least
in part) a workforce that does not meet the demands of current/future
employers as good at it could - insufficient numbers of engineers perhaps,
although I'm only guessing there. Perhaps one way of bringing labour supply
and demand closer together is for employers to pay for students *of their
choosing* to complete their education in return for a minimum number of
years of service to said employer after the education is completed. The
schooling is as specified by both the sponsor and the student. If the
student/employee should renege on their part of the agreement (e.g. drop out
of school, or otherwise only give x number of years of service when y is
required), then the student must repay the costs of their education to their
sponsor, the amount as determined by prior agreement between the relevant
parties. This is hardly a new idea, it's a form of scholarship and/or
apprenticeship both of which have been around a long time, but don't seem to
be used as much as they once were. Of course this is how some militaries
train their future officers and technicians (military colleges and such). I
also remember a friend who was put through accounting school by the firm at
which she eventually went to work. Co-op programs at universities aren't too
far off this mark. For technical training (plumbers, mechanics, etc.) this
could be done earlier, perhaps during high school years as part of workers'
high-school education, the technical part funded by future employers. Note
this would take some of the strain off our public schools and perhaps result
in more motivated and interested high-school students.
Having said all this, I don't mean for this system to
completely replace the current one - if somebody wants to take courses of
their own choosing at university or technical college, and they wish to pay
for them themselves, that's their choice, and I wish them well. Indeed, I'm
sure there are some subjects that would not be well served by such a
sponsorship system. Some of those subjects we'll need to keep, and we'll
have to be careful we don't lose them, but with tongue-in-cheek, maybe we
could hope that some of the time-and-money sink subjects would naturally die
off.
Anyway, I'm not wedded to these ideas, but merely
present them for discussion. One wonders what the faculty and teachers'
unions would have to say about such things.
Cheers, Mike Casey Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
=======
Dear Dr. Pournelle,
I personally don't think so. After I got out of the Army, I decided that
college would be just the thing for me before they took the rest of my
(Vietnam era) GI bill away. It took a while working full time and all, but I
finished with honors and got a decent job.
that lasted long enough to pay off almost all my debts
except the student loans and my house. The house will be paid off next year
but I don't know if the student loans ever will.
After the dot com crash and my job went away, I have
had 3 jobs and am back at the company I was before I had a degree. I am
making less than I was without a degree and those who were with me back then
are much advanced in the company even after two buy outs.
Not only that, but people without degrees but with
seniority are doing better than me. Of course I do not have any
"Certifications". I do have a nice piece of paper to hang on the side of my
cube though.
Patrick A. Hoage
=============
Subject: IQ, college, and diversity
A personal story
Straight out of high school I went to Reed College
because they wanted (geographic diversity) I did well on th SAT (690 verbal,
610 math) but still below the average there. The classes (especially
science) were frankly beyond me. I did not do well and got into bad habits,
and got kicked out. I got an IQ test and scored almost retarded in the
spatial tests. The tester said he had never seen a split like that (144
verbal, 98 performance, I might be a few points off) What that means is I
can trick anyone into thinking I'm smart, but have trouble putting together
a puzzle.
Years later I went back to school at a small liberal
arts school and got a business degree and a biology minor. The degree has
yet to pay off. I do wonder though if I had gone to a school more compatible
with my native abilities if I would not have done better in life so far. I
am not whining. Roanoke College is a good school and I had far more
opportunities there (a product design internship where we came up with a
product, business plan and patent, a market research internship at a tech
company, and a trip to Denmark to do bioinformatics research) than I had at
Reed, but the time it cost me!
I just got MCAT scores back, and I did in the top 1-2%
verbal, 80% physical science and 90-95% bio. I think that the top 1/10 of a
percent learn differently than the rest of us, even the moderately bright.
Trying to take Harvard's or Reed's pedagogy to the masses is foolish.
Someone once asked Richard Feinman how he solved problems. He said that he
looked at the problem, thought really hard, and then wrote down the answer.
I do have hopes for some environmental interventions
to raise IQ and improve behavior (creatine, omega-3's, micronutrients) But
the schools can't even do school lunches well. Let me repeat that: Schools
cannot provide vegetables. And we trust them with education?
Sorry to rant, but I wanted to contribute something to
your site.
Regards,
Robert Hull
You have in a nutshell described
the problem with affirmative action. The education methods that made Harvard
and Reed important do not work with the general population. I very nearly
went to Reed but the financial situation made it impossible: I had to make
do with the Korean War GI Bill, which was more generous than the Viet Nam
War veteran benefits but a lot less so than the WW II benefits; WW II vets
got tuition and books and allowances wherever they were enrolled, Korean got
a fixed sum of money for a fixed period of time. That left out Reed. I
suspect I am as well off. Iowa in my day had splendid professors -- see
upcoming BYTE columns for both details and how that's relevant to BYTE.
But putting people in over
their heads is not good practice. There needs to be a gradation in methods
even up in the upper tiers. Perhaps I should say especially in the upper
tiers of intelligence. That can to some extent be done by individual
instruction by the professors; I certainly had to do that at Pepperdine
where I had William Allen, Phil Karber, and some decent but average ability
students in the same undergraduate classes.
A New Sort Of University.
Jerry,
How would it be if there was a new sort of university?
Students on entry would between 25 and 35 years old. Old enough to be as
mature as they will ever be, and with enough working life before them to
repay society after graduation. The only other entry qualification would be
an IQ of 135 or more as measured by an abstract reasoning test after
training in taking such tests. Instruction would be free and the students
would be paid the industrial average wage so they would not deterred by
economic factors or need to to take outside work. The university would be
open to absolutely everyone who met the age and IQ qualification. Black,
white, yellow, brown, and for that matter purple, whether legal or illegal,
WASP or wetback, or in the case of the purple students, from Venus.
Where necessary instruction would start at basic
English as a second language, the two times table, and a is for apple
levels. There would be no shame in this. Ignorant is not the same as stupid.
When the student had the solid grounding that a rich bright child with rich
bright parents has when graduating from high school, the student would be
able to choose from a number of hard subject courses in science, medicine
and engineering. Subjects with studies, outreach, race, wimmin's, and media,
in the title would not be offered.
Testing would be frequent. Students who did not choose
to progress would be dismissed.
Think of the advantages to society at large. The
supply of smart people with useful training would be increased. The number
of smart, bitter, people who had decided that a career in crime would be the
best option would be decreased. Imagine the solid pride of a one time ghetto
drug dealer who would be able to tell Burt Rutan, "Harvard?". No. I attended
an elite university.
There must be a lot of clever and devoted teachers who
are quietly despairing while being trapped by career considerations in the
present education system. I don't think finding staff would be a problem.
Finding the right person to start the university would. Possibly an eminent
writer of science fiction with a background in mathematics and government
could be persuaded to become its head?
John Edwards
We can fiddle with the
admissions requirements: 135 is a bit high I think. 120 to 140 would do. But
if the school were honest in admissions it would be vastly more white than
black and would instantly be labelled racist.
As to your final suggestion,
I am a bit old. They wanted me to be president of a community college once
(to straighten it out) but I am not
qualified because I don't have an education/administration credential.
================
Dear Dr. Pournelle,
At the urging of many close to me, I went back to
college and earned an A.S. degree, with honors, in Computer Information
Technology. I graduated in late June; and now find myself washing dishes for
less than I made before spending two years investing in a supposed better
future. All the job-training is useless without employment available in the
field of study. It is really discouraging to those who, like myself, were
told to "work hard and you'll get ahead". I try to think positively but
being middle-aged in today's job market it is getting ever harder to be
self-supporting when all one can find are low-level service jobs.
Just another bit of anecdotal evidence to throw out
for you. I'm trying to keep a stiff upper lip and all that and still hoping
that someday this education will be the key to a better life. I pray so, for
myself and all the others who have invested in this road to (so far)
nowhere.
Yours, S
Hang in there. Things are
getting better. And good luck.
==================
Dr Pournelle:
I work on a university campus although I do not work
for the university. I am also sending a child through college so I am
intimately familiar with the expense.
Universities and colleges primary purpose (beyond
football and basketball) is to employ people who are otherwise unemployable.
Consider that many of the humanity degrees are basically unemployable
degrees. So colleges and universities provide these people with jobs so that
the institutions can say there are jobs for these disciplines. Now in order
to have anyone in the classes the institutions force students to take these
classes as part of their curriculum. Without these classes as part of the
curriculum an engineering student could learn everything in two to three
years instead of the four to five years now required.
Of course this also provides more money for the
colleges and universities to employ the otherwise unemployable. I won’t even
talk about the waste from spending on top of the line equipment and tossing
serviceable, but “not cool” equipment. High end top of the line PC’s for
secretaries that do nothing but type documents.
I walk by several class rooms in the building where I
work. What is particularly astounding is the many of the professors do not
speak English as a primary, perhaps even a secondary, language. Some of the
classes are taught by others than the professor as the professor is off
working on a pet project using student labor for most of the work with the
professor taking all the credit.
My son, along with several others, had to drop a class
because they could not understand the professor. The school would not refund
the tuition, no ifs, ands, or buts.
Of course there was a time past when Martin Marietta
would hire someone with any degree over someone with skills. I worked as a
contractor with these people who were basically incompetent and skill set
was very lacking. So at one time there jobs for people with degrees because
it was considered a good thing. But companies have been burned by the lack
of competent education and classes taught by professors that knew little
about their subject.
Bottom line is that colleges and universities are
about money, not about education. The more a college can spend the more it
can receive in state funds and the more that it can charge students. The
quality of education is not better, just more expensive.
Ray Thompson
The craze for degrees has to
do with affirmative action and credentialism: if you insist on credentials
you are in a stronger position if you hire one person over a certified
member of a certified victim group. Until we get past that idiocy, we will
continue to have deteriorating universities and an increasingly unqualified
work force.
What we need is a
constitutional amendment that says you cannot because of race deprive anyone
of the equal protection of the laws, and this time we really mean it.
=================
Subject: Yes, there will
always be an England
Dear Jerry,
Entertaining as it is, the story from the "American
Thinker" (linked to from Mail) on their
correspondent's recent trip to England contains so many falsities and
half-truths that it's somewhat laughable. I started doing a little fact
checking when I read about his trip's start at Trafalgar Square - I work on
the square, so enjoy it every day.
So you can imagine my surprise when I read of "Red"
Ken Livingstone's plan to replace the statues. As far as I can tell, there
is no such plan: instead, the plinth in the corner that's been empty since
it was erected is being used for a series of new works, one of which may
eventually occupy the site permanently. So far, I'm not keen on any of the
works (although Mark Wallinger's statue of Christ is probably the best), but
I like the idea. You can read the full story of the fourth plinth at http://www.fourthplinth.co.uk/,
and see pictures of the statues raised so far - plus its original, empty
state - at http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/gallery/0,8542,1005915,00.html.
I then carried on reading, putting that to one side.
After all, the idea that we'd let a plinth go empty for 164 years before
putting something in its place might not be obvious to a visiting tourist.
Next, though, I came to the part about how "the meddling Eurocrats in
Brussels have somehow determined that rocking horses, of all things, shall
have a maximum height of 60 centimeters." This set off my myth-sensors
tingling. There's so much nonsense talked about standards set by the EU that
this kind of statement often makes me go check the facts. So I did, and
found that, in fact, there's no such ruling. Instead, the British Standards
Institute - a venerable body that sets completely voluntary standards for a
variety of things - has, in collaboration with other equivalent European
bodies, set such a standard. Again, it's completely voluntary - there's no
law, ruling, or anything stopping people making and selling rocking horses
as large as houses if they want.
Next up came the statement that piggy banks are hard
to find after complaints from muslims. Given that Mr Williams started in
Trafalgar Sqaure, perhaps he should have done some shopping around there - a
wander through the "tourist" shops soon found one for me. As far as I can
tell, there's been only one recorded instance of a complaint from anyone of
the muslim faith in the UK about a pig-shaped toy - and that was in the
Midlands, in an office, and concerned a squeezy "stress reliever" rather
than a piggy bank.
Meanwhile, Mr Williams is in Cornwall, enjoying a
Cornish pasty. He claims that he'd better be fast, as "the pin- heads in
Brussels are going to change its name – it's hard to understand their
'logic' but something about European tourists thinking that have to go to
Cornwall to get one." In fact, there's no chance that it'll have to change
its name. The EU runs a scheme called "Protected Geographical Indication",
which is designed to help regions exploit the genuine tastes of their local
cuisine. Cornwall has applied to the EU to have the humble Cornish Pasty
registered under this scheme - which means that genuine cornish pasties
would have to be made there. Mr Williams' cornish pasty (from Cornwall!) is
safe.
Next, there was the school uniforms. Apparently,
according to Mr Williams, "school uniforms breach some ill-conceived "Human
Rights Act," so are no longer mandatory." This is just false. Although fewer
schools adopt uniforms - for other, and in my opinion wrong reasons - it's
nothing to do with the human rights act. State schools DO have an obligation
to account of the religion of their pupils, for example by allowing Muslim
girls to wear headscarves or Jewish boys to wear a yarmulka, but this is
merely an acceptance that freedom of religious practice should mean some
flexibility.
I have to confess that at this point, I was getting
too exasperated by the inaccuracies to carry on reading in detail. However,
I did get to the point at which Mr Williams arrived, hot-footed back to
London - although quite how he managed to make it to Devon, Oxford and
Northumberland (at the other end of the country!) in what from his narrative
looks like a single day baffles me.
I did, however, spot his point about " with nothing
better to do a Eurocrat named Francis Carpenter has suggested [Trafalgar
Square] be renamed in order to not offend the French whose defeat at the
hands of Admiral Nelson it commemorates." Mr Carpenter is pretty much on his
own in this (he's the head of the European Investment Fund, and spoke in a
personal capacity). As I write this, Trafalgar Square is being readied for
Sunday's celebration of the 200th Anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar,
tickets for which have already sold out, and which will feature marches,
parades, royalty and more (details at http://www.trafalgar200.com/). And the
French hardly seem offended: Back in June, they sent over the Charles de
Gaulle, the pride of the French navy, to take part in a review presided over
by the Queen to commemorate the battle - hardly the action of a
mortally-offended nation!
While I agree with the aims of what Mr Williams was
doing bandying around half-truths and falsities serves no one well. There
are too many battles against legitimate examples of political correctness to
be won to start tilting at windmills.
Best wishes, Ian Betteridge
Thank you! Ain't journalism
wonderful?
============
Out-of-this-world sex could jeopardise missions
http://www.newscientistspace.com/article.ns?id=dn8195
Their message:
Headline: Government Anthropologists Today Come to the
Same Conclusion as Robert Heinlein Did 44 Years Ago
(N.B.: the beginning of STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND.)
=================
Subject: IQ and Educational Tracking
I've always been suspicious of the use of tests to
lock people into career tracks at an early age. I suppose it comes from
being a child of the 60's, and of being raised to be suspicious of authority
figures. That the scientific data supports the proposal makes me only a
little less suspicious. You won't be surprised then, if I say that I find
many of your reader's proposals to sound very big brotherish. Essentially,
some authority figure, wiser than the rest, will decide on the basis of
scientific tests who will and will not be allowed into the upper tiers of
society. Instead of using class or race to stratify society, we will have a
scientifically defensible meritocracy. Will we all be required to have our
IQ's tattooed on our foreheads, so as to make the idiots around us more
evident? Those strong lads of limited intelligence might well make good
shock troops for the grunt work of the imperial army! Perhaps the votes of
high IQ's should be given double or triple weight? Just think of the
possibilities!
CP, Minnesota
The obvious remedy is drug the
high IQ people so they cannot perform better than the lower IQ. We can also
have equal schools. No child left behind because no child allowed to get
ahead. Shall we then choose leaders by lottery?
You will not make these
differences go away but you can certainly devise policies as if they did not
exist. The result will look like what we have. Really great.
TOP
CURRENT
VIEW Friday
|
