Facebook & 10 Years in Prison...

Cafe World and all those other games on Facebook are addictive, no doubt. However, I am not sure that they are that addictive that I would be even slightly tempted to leave a 13-month old baby in the bath by themselves while I go and cook some cakes or harvest a few crops in Farmville or even have a few 1-minute rounds of Bejeweled Blitz.

Shannon Johnson of Fort Lupton in northern Colorado was sentenced to 10 years in jail for allowing her 13-month old son to drown in the bath while she played Cafe World and check her status updates.

According to Johnson she wanted her son, Joseph, to be an independent baby and not be a "mama's boy". Also Johnson claims to have been traumatised as a child from constantly being told "no". Therefore, she was committed to never saying no to her own child. And, subsequently Johnson was claiming that little Joseph himself asked to be left alone in the bath.

Sadly, Johnson had been warned of the dangers of leaving an infant in the bath by themselves. This warning came from Johnson's own mother, but the advice was ignored and tragically it was little Joseph that paid the ultimate price.

The point of this post is not to bang on about Facebook or Mark Zuckerberg being ultimately responsible for Joseph's death because they facilitated Johnson's addiction. To the contrary, it is really about parenting and what constitutes good parenting and how we learn to be good parents. I have been wondering how, as parents, we learn to find that balance between allowing our children their independence and protecting them from the dangers that surround them?

The learning curve is steep.

The Government, The Internet, and A Little Revolution...

This came via the Treespotter via the Hammer of Truth.

Has technology changed the face of revolution?

The Legitimacy of the Obama Presidency...

It is funny in that perverse kind of a way to watch Republicans dodge, but not really, questions of Obama's citizenship and subsequent legitimacy with respect to being president. The latest Republican to play the double talk game is none other than House Speaker John Boehner. It is equally funny in that perverse kind of a way that Republicans still imagine that this is an issue that is going to be a major vote getter for them in the 2012 presidential elections.

Nah, Boehner hedged his bets as he is often seen doing on tobacco. Boehner's argument is in essence that he believes Obama is a citizen and a Christian. Now, according to Boehner, if the good ol' state of Hawaii says that Obama was born there then that is good enough for him. On the is Obama a Christian or a Muslim front Boehner is much more non-committal and merely says that he takes the president on his word. After all, in Boehner's mind President Obama has stated he is Christian so that will have to do for now.

The real funny here is that rather than being unequivocal in stating that the question of Obama's citizenship and religion is a non-issue, a dead issue, Boehner goes on to say that the American public is entitled to believe whatever they want. This is indeed true, Mr. Speaker. If Americans want to believe that no US man ever landed on the moon and that it was all a big hoax constructed in a studio in Hollywood somewhere as an elaborate ruse to fool the Russians that they had lost the space race, then they are entitled to believe that too. Similarly, if Americans want to believe that there are a couple of aliens on ice at Roswell or in Area 51, then they can do that too.

The fact that democrats lost so much ground at the mid-terms was not because they did, or continue to do, a woeful job in government. Rather it is a reflection of the inability of democrats to remobilise the 2008 base that swept Democrats into power and Obama into the White House. There is no guarantee that the Democrats will make the same mistake twice. The balancing factor here is that the current state of the economy and Obama's difficulties in following through on some of his election campaign rhetoric means that it must be easier for Republicans to mobilise their base, including the fringe represented by the Tea Party.

But, as the Speaker of the House, the responsible move would have been to be unequivocal that Obama is a citizen, this is no longer an issue and Republicans will not be using it to question the legitimacy of the President. One would have thought that Republicans would have believed that Obama's domestic and international track record since 2008 provides more than enough problems for the Democrats that there is no need to resort to fear-mongering about citizenship and Obama's supposed Muslim faith.

All that said, I remain an interested observer.

Northern California, Second Graders, and Oral Sex...

Yes, if you are shaking your head at the title of this post, then you are not alone. As I read through the article that I found on Yahoo earlier, and which forms the basis for this post, I was shaking my head too and wondering how it is that this sort of behaviour can happen.

The story originates out of Markham Elementary School in Oakland. The principal was forced to notify parents that a teacher was placed on leave while the school investigates claims that students were not only disruptive in class, but had in fact stripped off and engaged in sexual acts, oral sex to be precise. Preliminary investigations by the school indicate that the complaints have merit and warrant even further investigation.

According to the school, "We believe if the reports are true, there was a serious lapse of judgment or lack of supervision in the classroom." The school then went on to say "We're investigating how could this have happened. It seems unthinkable to us, just the same way it does to the public." Do you think?

The male teacher claims that he was unaware of any of the alleged acts and has stated unequivocally that he did not witness anything that has so far been suggested. Yet, as a teacher, I find it difficult to believe that if he was present in the classroom as he is required to be, then it is pretty hard not to witness children getting their gear off and engaging in sex acts, particularly when these children are in the second grade.

More disturbing is how children of 7, 8 or perhaps 9 years of age are aware of this kind of behaviour. Personally, I cannot recall when I became aware of oral sex, but I am absolutely certain I was not thinking about it in the second grade. As I recall, I did not even get the benefit of sex education, or as it was called at the time "personal development" class, until I was in Year 9 (Ninth Grade).

The school maintains that it is doing everything in its power to ensure that this does not happen again. The school has also offered counselling and any other assistance required to help those children who were involved.

I am still shaking my head. How does something like this happen on seemingly such a large scale in a classroom?

The mind boggles.

Is Obama Eligible to be President of the United States of America?

Yes, he is!

Nevertheless, it would seem that a group of "Birthers" will not be satisfied until such time as the president provides an original birth certificate. Yet, considering the manner in which birthers have gone about their task to date, an original birth certificate is unlikely to close off their beliefs. The cold, hard reality for birthers is that the State of Hawaii, the State where Barack Hussein Obama II was born, has already released enough data in its public records to put this to bed.

To be honest a certificate of live birth and the corresponding birth notices, both of which are contemporary to the event, should be more than enough. It is a truly bizarre claim that Obama is in essence a "Manchurian Candidate" that has been groomed since birth for this task of destroying the US from within as her president.

Interestingly, the Governor of Hawaii, Neil Abercrombie, wanted to assist in putting this matter to bed. However, the State's Attorney General, David Louie, has instructed the Governor that the Governor is barred by law from releasing the private birth certificates of individuals without their consent. Simply, the only person who can consent to the release of the Obama birth certificate is Barack Obama  himself. So, if Obama remains true to past form, it would seem unlikely that a birth certificate will be forthcoming. And, to be honest it is not necessary.

Hawaii has confirmed that the original documents have been cited and confirmed and that information is contained in the State's vital records. So, to all intents and purposes, Hawaii is satisfied that Barack Hussein Obama II was born at Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu on 4 August 1961.

Then again, Hawaii's failure to release the originals is obviously, as the birthers will contend, all part of the grand conspiracy. After all, Obama was born in Kenya, is an Indonesian citizen and a practicing Muslim, right?

Ho hum...

Does Obama Dye His Hair?

And, for today's most important news story:

There are probably more important things to talk about with regards to President Obama's performance as Commander-in-Chief, such as rejuvenating a depressed jobs sector. On the dying front, I guess a man has gotta do what a man has gotta do. And, if that means dying your hair to hide some of the stresses of office then so be it.

Ho hum...

Texting and Walking and Falling and Suing...

This is the video that started off a trend. It had plenty of people rolling around on the floor laughing or in abbreviated speak ROFLMAO.



And, this is the response of the woman (albeit a beat-up of the interview she gave to Good Morning America on ABC), Cathy Cruz Marrero. Marrero is the unfortunate soul who was caught on the mall CCTV falling into a water fountain in the Berkshire Mall in Pennsylvania while she was texting her friend.



Now, it seems that Marrero has decided that it is probably worth trying to sue the mall where she fell into the fountain. It appears that Marrero and her lawyer, James Polyak, believe that they have a case to pursue because Marrero could have been seriously hurt and because the security guard did not organise for someone to come to her aid. The security guard was clearly too busy laughing to organise a call for someone to help, or was he. It is yet to be proven when the tape that appears on YouTube was actually made.

The YouTube version, at least to my technologically challenged brain, to be a mobile phone video of the CCTV footage. This could have been made 5, 20, 50 minutes after the Marrero fall. It could have also been made 2 or 3 days later. However, more research is required on that front. Nevertheless, watching the footage suggests that Marrero was not badly hurt as she gets out of the fountain and then high-tails it out of there. There is good reason why Marrero does this. She is an employee in a store that operates in the Mall. In any event, she did not hang around and wait for any assistance to be rendered.

The security guard that was on duty when the fall occurred has been fired.

The truth of the matter is that the footage should never have become public. But, that is the nature of the world we live in now. Technology ensures that much of the stupidity we get caught out doing or being a part of will one day makes its way online. Yet, how much should the mall management be expected to stump up for the footage making it into the public domain?

Unfortunately, for Marrero, and by her own admission, texting and walking at the same time can be dangerous as she has found out the fountain fall way. The reason she fell into the fountain was because she was not paying attention. For the mall to be liable for the fall means that the courts would have to accept that they have a responsibility to fence of fountains and place warning signs throughout the mall that it is dangerous to text and walk at the same time because you might walk into a fountain, or a glass door, or fall down an escalator.

Perhaps the answer is that malls ban mobile / cell phones. That is, when you come to the mall you have to check your phone at the "phone counter". You get a ticket and can reclaim your mobile phone on the way out of the mall.

There has to be a point where people start assuming more responsibility for their own actions, doesn't there?

Sometimes, though, your fifteen minutes of fame ensure that the spotlight shines on all of your past. Although the interview would suggest that Marrero's unfortunate spill occurred while texting a friend from church, it would seem that Marrero's past is not all angelic. As it turns out, Marrero is also involved in a court case where she has been charged and indicted for theft by deception. Marrero used a co-worker's credit cards to buy more than USD 6000 worth of goods from Target and Zales. Apparently, if found guilty, Marrero is to be sentenced to six months house arrest and required to wear an electronic monitoring device. I wonder if the electronic monitoring device is waterproof?

Kidnapped: Reunited 23 Years Later...

I tend to spend the odd minute or two surfing the internet. Every now and then, a story jumps out for its horror, its tragedy, its bizarreness or, as in this case seemingly, a happy ending. A young woman who was kidnapped 23 years ago has finally been reunited with her birth mother. It is hard to imagine what sort of feelings one must have learning that you had been kidnapped and have in essence lost 23 years of a potential parallel life. So, when Carlina White / Nejdra Nance says it "felt like a dream", you still wonder whether even in your wildest dreams you would have dreamed that such a day would happen.

The story is one that probably happens a lot more than we care to allow ourselves to acknowledge. The kidnap of children is not a new phenomenon or crime. However, it is rare to here of such happy reunions after such a long period of time.

A 19-day-old Carlina was kidnapped in 1987. The story began with a simple fever and a trip to a Harlem hospital. It ended with Carlina being kidnapped by a woman posing as a nurse and spending the next 23 years living with an abusive "parent". Carlina ended-up pregnant herself at 16 and this is when she started connecting the dots of her own life. A request for a birth certificate could not be fulfilled. The suspicions began to come to the fore as to why that might be. Ultimately, Carlina bailed out of the abusive home in Connecticut and headed to Georgia.

While in Georgia, Carlina met up with the Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The Center filled in a few of the blanks and joined the rest of the dots. A DNA test and a few phone calls put Carlina back in contact with her birth mother, Joy White.

The emotions for Joy White and the rest of Carlina's long lost family most be overwhelming too, particularly when they are not only getting back a lost daughter, sister, cousin, aunt or whatever, but Carlina has since had a daughter herself.

Hopefully, this is a story that continues to have a happy ending.

Gayus Tambunan, Seven Years, and Justice Seen to be Done?

Gayus Tambunan, the corrupt tax official, received a sentence of seven years for his crimes. On hearing the verdict, Gayus thanked the judges for being fair and impartial, lambasted the incompetent and lying Legal Mafia Eradication Taskforce, and hinted that the CIA was involved in the process of helping him out.

The big question that most people are asking in the immediate aftermath of this decision is: "Was justice done and was justice seen to be done?" Perhaps the 'real' question is whether there is any difference in those two concepts; justice and justice seen to be done.

The prosecution demanded a sentence of 20 years. When one considers the scope of the fraud and the corruption that was alleged in this case, then 20 years was probably not a manifestly excessive request. So, a sentence of 7 years does seem to be on the light, the very light, side of the justice equation. This leads to the idea of justice being seen to be done. In this case, seven years leaves a bitter taste in one's mouth when there are others sent to prison for fraud and corruption cases that involved considerably less losses for considerably longer periods of time. Justice was not seen to be done in this case.

It is a foregone conclusion that the prosecution will appeal this verdict. Based on the 12 instructions issued by the president, it would be a toss-up as to whether the president would want this case to be an ongoing distraction. Perhaps, the Legal Mafia Eradication Taskforce will say "we have done our job and we are outta here...thanks for coming!" After all, the president said he wanted the Gayus case resolved, and it is. Although, the result is hardly a positive outcome for anyone but Gayus who would have been thinking that 20 years was a very real possibility.

Nevertheless, the real question for the president, for law enforcement officials, and to a lesser extent the community is "what happens next?" The reality is that the trial of Gayus Tambunan was a media circus, but in amongst all those shenanigans were some rather explosive allegations and counter-allegations. All of these allegations must be investigated and  'resolved'.

The companies that had dealings with Gayus need to be worried. The individuals that have had dealings with Gayus or who are in someway connected to him need to be worried. The biggest issue now facing the president is does he modify his instructions a little to demand that the KPK become the lead investigator on all these matters or does he let the corruption-tainted national police force continue to participate in a charade where public perception is clearly that the police are operating in a way to protect their own interests and their own people.

The reason this is such a test for SBY is that some of the companies involved are conglomerates owned by well-connected people with special interests that they will be seeking to remove from public scrutiny. The "biggie" now is does the president have the testicular fortitude to take these matters head on an exhibit some leadership to his people? Or, does he do as he has always done hand it off to one of his many minions so that he can later use "plausible deniability"?

But, getting back to the sense of justice and justice being seen to be done. The argument is really one about what is a legally sound judgment and what is a sound judgment with respect to public perceptions. Seven years does not satisfy the public perception of either justice or justice being seen to be done. In a strict legal sense, a seven-year sentence may in fact be fair in light of what the prosecution was able to prove regarding the indictment charged.

Finally, the statement by Gayus that intimated that the Legal Mafia Eradication Taskforce had provided assurances of certain conduct being undertaken and promises being made that were not fulfilled must also be investigated, particularly as this taskforce reports directly to the president and seemingly works at his discretion. Perhaps Gayus was misled into believing a promise from the taskforce was a promise from the president?

The CIA involvement angle may well become a side-show of some importance as it has the potential to distract from the real issues in the case. The US Ambassador, Scot Marciel, wasted no time in suggesting that the whole CIA claim was nothing more than an attempt to divert attention from other aspects of the case. But, then again, he would, wouldn't he?

Ho hum...next case!

California: "Superstorm"...

Australia has been subject to some pretty catastrophic flooding over the past month, particularly in Queensland and more recently in Victoria. So, it was with interest that I read this story about a California "Superstorm". At first, the story reads like an overview for an 'end of days' or 'apocalyptic' end of the world film. Yet, the further one reads the more serious and real sounding it becomes. The icing on the cake though is that the history of superstorms in the region is fairly well documented and the US Geological Survey people have done some science on the phenomenon that indicates that the superstorm might not be that far away.

So, what does it look like for California? Well, the 100 or so heads that came together to try and work this out came up with a scenario that saw about one-quarter of the state flooded and a damage bill somewhere between USD 300 and USD 400 billion. It seems that there might be a time in the future where California will need the Governator (aka Arnold Schwarzenegger) once again.

The scientific model that the experts are working with is Biblical in the sense that it shows 40 days of constant rain that sees a deluge of more than 3 meters of water inundating the Central Valley.

The arguments for a superstorm do not seemingly rely on global warming, and the history of the superstorm suggests that California has been victim of severe flooding in the past. However, scientists do note that we are in a pattern of rising atmospheric temperatures that are critical to creating the conditions necessary to allow a superstorm to develop.

How prepared is California? And, more to the point, can one ever be prepared enough for a storm of such magnitude?

The mind boggles at the power of Mother Nature.

Jury Duty...Meow!

Today's posts have been a little heavy. So, it is time to lighten the mood somewhat.

Here is bureaucracy in action.

Sal, the pet cat, has been summonsed for pussy jury duty. It would seem that in spite of Sal's limited language and comprehension skills, and the fact that he is a cat, he is still required for jury duty at the Suffolk Superior Crown Court in Boston.

Sal's owner, Anna Esposito told the powers that be that Sal was a cat. She even went to the trouble of getting Sal's vet to confirm that Sal was not fit for jury duty. It would certainly liven up proceedings to see a cat occupying Chair No. 12. It would be even more fun if young Sal was elected forepussy  foreperson of the jury. But, when push comes to shove, it will not take the court long to realise that Sal is disqualified from sitting on the jury because he does not speak English.

On a serious note though. This case should highlight how badly bureaucracy can get things wrong. Perhaps it is something one needs to remember when dealing with a bureaucracy, as frustrating as they can be. The cat for jury duty arose because the last US census asked for people to note down family pets. It seems Sal graduated from family pet to family member, and then qualified for jury duty.

I have to say, this story certainly allowed me a giggle. After all, could you imagine Sal sitting on the jury in a case of a dog doing the doo on the pavement? The dog is a goner, electric chair all the way!

"No Baby" Campaign...

If this is not an advertisement for finding an effective way to provide sexual health and reproduction lessons in school, then it is hard to work out exactly what would be. In one Memphis, Tennessee, high school there have been 86 teenage pregnancies within the last 12 months. Some of those young women, 15 - 19-years-old have given birth and the others will soon do so. Reports suggest that Frayser High School is not extraordinary as the rate of teenage pregnancy in the area where Frayser High School is located is currently running at 26%.

The mind boggles as I really cannot get my head around the idea of more than a quarter of the girls being pregnant. This is particularly so when I think back to my high school days where it would have been hard to find 25% of the student population that was sexually active let alone a quarter of the girls being pregnant.

A "No Baby" seems to be a case of closing the barn door after the horse has bolted. Nevertheless, a response of some kind has to be made in order to attempt to arrest the continuing increase in teenage pregnancy numbers.

The thrust of the campaign is teaching girls that it is alright for them to say no to sex. The overriding theme of the program is to develop the confidence of young woman and to empower them to make decisions by educating them to their rights. The program, from what I can tell, is also educating these young women about pregnancy and the challenges it will pose to them now and in the future. The program is also designed to ensure that these young woman are well-educated to the best practices of pre and post-natal care.

The scope of the problem facing the Memphis area school system is obvious when one looks at overall US statistics relating to teenage pregnancy. The data from 2009 states that the national average for 15 - 19 year-olds is 39 births per 1000 girls. However, this rate is much higher than the numbers in Western Europe. In Australia, the numbers are pretty low, but they are rising. This rise is attributed to a decline in the quality and frequency of these issues being discussed and taught in the classroom environment.

It is unclear whether the lower numbers in Western Europe and Australia are attributable to better education or just better teenage awareness of contraception and pregnancy. In Australia, at least in NSW, the responsibility for teaching students about sexual health falls under the curriculum of the Personal Development, Health and Physical Education (PDHPE) framework.

PDHPE is not my area of expertise. To be honest I have only looked at the curriculum sparingly. I have only looked at one text book on the subject, the one used by Cootamundra High School. To my uneducated self, there seems to be more than enough in the curriculum and the textbook to get the job done.

My personal view is that it is critical that we arm our children with all of the tools necessary to allow them to make informed decisions about what they want to do and how they want to do it. It is important that we encourage our children to be responsible and to take responsibility. Therefore, I am in favour of ratcheting-up the time that is spent on the teaching of sexual health / personal development in the classroom. The reality, as I see it, is that it would be remiss not to try.

I have a good few years yet before I will have to be sitting young Will down for the inevitable birds and the bees talk...

Arnold Schwarzenegger Drops a Cool USD 200 Million...

Ah, the lives of the rich and famous!

I like Arnold Schwarzenegger. He is in many ways the embodiment of success and to all intents and purposes representative of "living the American Dream". I am almost certain that there are many who disagree with me, but after all it is my blog and I can hold whatever opinion I like :)

I have always admired those who choose to go into public service. There is no higher calling than public service, and this is true irrespective of your political stripes; it simply does not matter whether you are labor or liberal, democrat or republican, green, socialist, democratic socialist or whatever. This is also irrespective of the few bad apples who see public service as a means of feathering their own nests, they are a minority in the big scheme of things.

So, it was with interest that I read about an interview that Arnold Schwarzenegger gave to an Austrian newspaper where he said that he estimated that being Governor of California cost him USD 200 million. But, what was most enlightening was that he felt it was more than worth it.

Schwarzenegger is a renowned family man, so it was not a surprise to read that the biggest challenge for him was managing his family time. A loss of family time is often an excuse that is used not to enter public service or to leave it once one has been in it for some time. In many ways that is why public service is such a high calling. It is not only the individual elected, or appointed, to office that make sacrifices in order to serve the greater public good, the family of that individual also must sacrifice.

It will be interesting to see what moves Schwarzenegger makes now. Does he go back to movies? Does he hit the lecture circuit? Does he just kick back and relax? Or does he start lobbying for a change to the Constitution in order that he, and other non-US born citizens can run for President?

Although, the "Birthers" might argue that it does not really matter anymore as that Kenyan born, Indonesian passport holding interloper from Chicago (aka Barack Hussein Obama) has already usurped the Office of the President of the United States of America. But, seriously though, non-US born citizens cannot become President of the US without there being a constitutional amendment to permit it.

Whenever, I think about Arnold Schwarzenegger becoming president of the US I have to have a little chuckle. I always remember that Sylvester Stallone movie, Demolition Man, where he has been cryogenically frozen and upon being refrozen he learns that Arnold Schwarzenegger had been president. How prophetic would that be?

"Battle Hymn of a Tiger Mother"...

Parenting is an art form, of this there is no doubt. And, as an art form, there are styles one likes and approves of and there are styles that one does not like nor approves of. Yet, there is no one style that is 100% guaranteed to be successful in producing a well-adjusted and accomplished child who grows into an adult that contributes to their community in positive ways. Or is there?

There was an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal the other week written by Amy Chua, an American with a Filipino heritage and a Chinese ancestry. The article was titled "Why Chinese Mothers are Superior". The general gist of the article follows the substance of Chua's arguments for successful parenting that she describes in her book "Battle Hymn of a Tiger Mother".

I have not read the book, so this is not a book review. It is not a critique of her parenting style either. It is merely an opinion piece on how one might decide which style to adopt. Perhaps the point is that each person is unique and each family is unique so maybe it is a case of manipulating styles by taking the best of many styles or those bits that work and co-opting them into a style of your own.

But, back to Amy Chua and what has worked for her. Stereotypes are powerful things and it is to see them when you want to, or feel the need to, label certain things. So, why is it that Chinese children are such high achievers? The generalisation aside assuming that there has to be one Chinese child somewhere that does not fit the stereotypical bill of "high achiever", but nevertheless this is the stereotype, right? Are Chinese children high achievers because they are intellectually more capable or is it that they are more driven courtesy of strict parenting practices.

The Chua argument probably follows the line that strict parenting plays a fundamental role in ensuring 'successful' outcomes for one's children. There are plenty of children who would balk at the prospect of a home where they were not allowed to do the following:

• attend sleepovers;
• have play dates;
• be in a school play;
• complain about not being in a school play;
• watch TV or play computer games;
• choose their own extra-curricular activities;
• get a grade less than A;
• not be the  No. 1 student in a subject (exceptions for gym / PDHPE and drama)
• play any instrument other than the piano and violin (and you have to play at least one of either the piano or violin)

As a parent I am balking at this list. Maybe that is because this is not how I was brought up. So, may be our parenting styles tend to reflect those of our parents before us. As a parent I do not want to be that strict. I want Will to be able to take some responsibility for the things he wants to, and chooses to, do. Admittedly, at two-years-old he is going to have less of a say in this.

For us it is more about understanding what learning style will provide the best outcomes. Even at an early age it is easy enough to see that Will is a musical and visual learner. Nevertheless, he loves to read and enjoys acting and role-playing. So, the idea of not allowing him to pursue that seems to be counter-productive.

Then there are personal philosophies that have me believing that sleepovers and social interaction with his peers on his own terms through extra-curricular activities, like sport, and also fundamental to his overall development as a human being.

Parenting is a difficult skill. We are enjoying the ride, but it is certainly a case of learning on the job. It is also a case of trial and error, working through what gets the outcome we want to see and reworking those methods that don't or discarding them altogether.

The point overall, is I am not going to ridicule Chua's style and I am not going to write-off her book as a recollection of how she abused her children's rights, as some have. I am likely to be looking for the book next time I am in the bookstore. Besides, Chua is law professor at Yale...can't argue with that :)

With parenting, ultimately we all want the same outcome: happy, healthy, wise, and well-adjusted young people who contribute to their communities. How we get there, to each their own.

Face Tattoo...

You have to be really sure on your art work when you are using your own skin as a canvas. This is even more so when you are thinking of getting something tattooed on your face.

I am sure that US rapper Gucci Mane gave some thought to the latest addition to his portfolio. Then again, maybe not! Mane had been doing a stint in an Atlanta psychiatric hospital. He thought that he would recognise that moment by getting a three-scoop ice-cream cone tattooed on his face. The ice-cream has a few lightning bolts hitting the scoops and Mane's favourite phrase, "Brrr", close by.

Seriously, why would someone get an ice-cream cone tattooed on their face?

So, what flavour did he choose for the scoops of ice-cream?

Who Owns Facebook and What is it Really Worth?

The ongoing spat between the Minister for [Mis]Communication and [Mis]Information, Tifatul Sembiring (aka TitS), and RIM over porn and taxes (whoever it was that said the two certain things in life were 'death and taxes' had not met TitS) got me thinking about over companies that could conceivably be making pots of cash out of their Indonesian presence and not paying a Rupiah for the pleasure.

So, considering that Indonesia has consistently been a leading growth market for Facebook, I was wondering how much Facebook was worth and who owned what. This has become a little easier now that Goldman Sachs has taken the Facebook plunge and made an investment that sees little old Facebook now valued at a whopping USD 50 billion.

I was led to the graphics from a couple of links at the Treespotter's blog.

The first graphic shows who owns what.

The second graphic shows how Facebook came to be valued at USD 50 billion.

I wonder if the Minister has every thought of starting a nationalist flavoured campaign against Facebook in an attempt to extract some tax revenue out of a company that is obviously cashing in on the consistently high growth that the Indonesia market is providing?

Maybe he could just go after the personal stake of founder and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg. (Which reminds me, I have a copy of "The Social Network" upstairs that I want to watch...see ya! Oh, by the way, was there ever a film about Napster?)

Blood Libel: The Sarah Palin Defense...

Politics is a heated business at the best of times, and rhetoric is often emotive and extreme. There is undoubtedly consequences from this continual ratcheting-up of the rhetoric and the anger. Whether or not the recent mass-killings in Tuscon, Arizona, are proof of this remains a contentious issue of debate. However, Sarah Palin, the one-time Governor of Alaska and Republican Vice-Presidential candidate, is at the center and forefront of this debate.

Sarah Palin makes up for her deficiencies as a politician by using extremely emotive language that disguises the fact that she does not know much about what she must know about to ever become President of the United States. In the lead-up to the recent mid-term elections in the US she was responsible for producing a map that had cross-hairs marking marginal congressional seats that she believed the Tea Party could "target" and win. One of these seats was that of Gabrielle Giffords. Giffords was shot and critically wounded in the Tuscon shootings.

The point of this post is not to question whether that sort of action is an incitement to act that requires some individual who is a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic basket to go buy a gun and kill a few people. To each their own on that one. This post is about how Palin has responded to the accusation that her extreme rhetoric is a trigger to this violence.

Palin stayed quiet for several days. In hindsight, she should have stayed quiet. Palin posted the following video on her Facebook page:



The argument that "acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own" is only true to the extent that the person who commits those crimes, in this case pulls the trigger, is responsible for their actions. However, it would be naive to suggest that every action is independent of every other action. It would be remiss to just accept that people cannot be incited to act when they might otherwise have not acted. Although, in this instance, it would seem that Jared Lee Loughner, the shooter, had serious issues way before Palin started bandying around maps with cross-hairs.

Yet, Palin was not willing to leave it there she then went on to say this:

“Especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence that they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”

Blood Libel is an emotive term. It is a loaded term. It has a very specific meaning that is linked to anti-Semitism. Blood libel in essence is a myth that Jews sacrificed Christian children in the lead up to Passover. The blood of these Christian children was then used in medicinal rituals and to bake unleavened bread (matzsos). The blood libel myth has been used throughout history to justify pogroms against Jews and is an underlying piece of the propaganda puzzle that has been employed to justify some of the most heinous atrocities committed by humans against their fellow human beings.

A blood libel is not simply just a false accusation, but rather there are very specific understandings that go with the use of the term.

What is even more bizarre about this line of defense is that Gabrielle Giffords is a Jew. Surely, Sarah Palin and her people are not that stupid that they did not do the hard research yards to firstly find out what the term meant and secondly to think about the context in which they were about to use it, or are they?

Let's assume that she or her minions are not that stupid, then this is a cold, calculating, and deliberate attempt to inflame and incite this situation even further. It is only fair to question Palin's motivations for using the term blood libel. Is Palin suggesting that like the Jews she is being falsely accused or is she suggesting that it is a Jewish conspiracy to undermine her?

I am all for freedom of speech. As much as it sometimes pains me, I do believe that there is a freedom of speech that we all enjoy. But, I believe that freedom of speech and expression is not absolute. The freedoms that we enjoy to speech and expression must be used responsibly. When one chooses to exercise their freedom of speech and expression irresponsibly then they must be brought to account.

In this instance, there were so many other ways and terms that Sarah Palin could have employed to have made the point that she thought she was being unfairly criticised with regards to the Tuscon killings. However, she chose to use a term that was designed to prolong the controversy and to keep the news cycle running and to keep her name at the front and center of that news cycle.

I wonder if the next news-bite from the Palin camp will be about exercising a few of her rights under the Bill of Rights, perhaps she might start exercising her Second Amendment rights not just to keep and bear arms but start using them to return America to exceptionalism?

I am shaking my head at the thought of a Palin run for the presidency of the US...

Heidi: 15 Minutes of Opossum Fame...

The internet and social networking media is a powerful tool and a revealing insight into what makes us tick as human beings. Heidi the cross-eyed opossum is an excellent example of both this power and insight.

Heidi is an opossum. She is 2.5 years old. Her claim to fame is that she is cross-eyed and incredibly cute and cuddly.

She also has a Facebook page with 80,000 fans, a YouTube song, and soon a plush toy replica of herself. Heidi and her sister Naira came from a zoo in Denmark and are soon to be the resident attractions at the Leipzig zoo in Germany.

Heidi is to be the main draw in a tropical exhibit that the Leipzig zoo is opening in July. In essence, Heidi's fame is peaking way before the exhibit actually opens and people, or is that "fans", get to see her in the flesh.

So, if one can harness the power of the internet and social media for an opossum, I wonder what you could do for the promotion of an out-of-left-field political candidate, say in the 2014 Indonesian presidential election (after all, it worked for now President Obama in the US, right?)

You have to admit, she is really cute...

Women With Low IQ and Rich Men...

This post is based on an article that I discovered in my morning crawl through cyber space. It was published in Cleo Australia in the June 2010 edition and can be found online.

The gist of the article is that researchers from Michigan University have found that women with a lower IQ are more likely to pursue rich men in comparison to women with a higher intellect. As I read through the Cleo article I found my self shaking my head and wondering whether the story was just a beat-up or was the study real.

So, I did a Google search and found an article in the Daily Mail from the UK that reported the same study. Then I just continued to shake my head chuckling at the thought that universities provided funding for research of this kind.

According to the lead researcher, Dr Christine Stanik, it makes sense that women with limited education and career opportunities to seek out rich men to provide them financial security that they would otherwise never achieve.

I always figured it to be a stereotype without substance, but research is research, right?

No offense intended to any of those individuals in the picture with Hugh Hefner. It was the picture that accompanied the story, although I found the picture here.

Foreign Sex Tourism to Bali..

I read this the other day and sort of pondered whether to write about it or not. I pondered because writing about how the system fails so enormously might encourage pedophiles to chance their hand in the wild frontiers of child sex tourism that are the poor provinces of Eastern Bali. The most impoverished of the provinces; Singaraja, Buleleng, and Karangasem, are those that are most at risk.

Sadly, according to the report, it is predominantly Australians that are taking advantage of Bali's children and sexually abusing them. The reported figures are the tip of the iceberg as a great many of the outrages perpetrated against these children are never reported nor, if they are reported, ever pursued to prosecution. Nevertheless, this is not exclusively Australian perpetrators as there are offenders from all parts of the globe, including Europe (Germany, France, The Netherlands, to name but a few) and the US.

The problem though is not exclusively one of poverty, although poverty is a significant factor, but rather of apathy and corruption combined with an inordinate amount of red tape from a cumbersome bureaucracy that is not pro-active in protecting and supporting children who have been abused.

There were thirteen foreign pedophiles convicted of child sex offences in the period between 2001 and 2008. This does not seem like a large amount considering that there were more than 200 reported incidents of child sex abuse.  A local non-governmental organisation, Committee Against Sexual Abuse, estimates that there are some 150 pedophiles operating on Bali. It does not help that Singaraja does not yet record data relating to pedophiles or child sex crimes.

I appreciate that these crimes can be difficult to investigate and prosecute because not all children or their families are willing to report sexual abuse or suspicions of sexual abuse. I also appreciate that some families unwittingly sell their children into the sex trade in the belief that the "real" intent of the trafficker is to provide an education and a job. Then there are others who perhaps do this knowingly. However, what I cannot understand is why police would not want to investigate pedophilia in a more pro-active way considering that it is a known problem in the areas of Eastern Bali?

Although, in the big scheme of things I am probably less surprised than I should be that one can place a "price" on the violation of a child. Maybe it is just a simple case of everything has its price, and the price to turn a blind eye to the sexual violation of children in impoverished places is undoubtedly not that much.

Is the answer as simple as education and community outreach where men, women, and children are taught that it is not OK to be sexually abused in exchange for food or payment of one's school fees. There is no problem if someone wants to provide you food or fees for school as a gift, but this does not mean that you owe them the innocence of your children to pay off some alleged debt.

It would appear that the modus operandi is now one of "out of sight, out of mind" as pedophiles go further and further away from main urban areas in search of their victims.

What I do not get at the moment, and perhaps this is a lack of research, is why Australia is not more pro-active in pursuing Australian pedophiles wherever they may be found. Australia has laws on its statute books that provide for jail terms of up to 17 years and fines of up to AUD 500,000 for those convicted of child sex offences. The law has been drafted as such that the crime does not have to occur in Australia. The law simply states that anyone who engages in a sexual act with a child under 16 or grooms a child under 16 for sex is guilty of a crime, even where the offence is committed overseas.

The Australian Federal Police website includes a section on Child Sex Tourism and has forms to complete for those who have suspicions about Australians who may have committed a child sex offence overseas.

I am not sure what the point of this post is. It is an issue that bothers me and it is one that I think needs more attention. Perhaps, it is as a father of a young son I cannot fathom such an atrocity happening to him. Perhaps, it is because as an educator I feel a responsibility to ensure that children are safe and know what is acceptable and what is not, after all, our children are our future. Maybe, it is just that getting it out there will get us thinking about it and being more vigilant in our own worlds.