By Bobby Ingram

digg_url = 'http://www.cracked.com/article_15838_six-musicians-with-pasts-they-hope-youll-forget.html';
digg_title = '5 Questions Lost Writers Must Answer (And Why They Wont)';
digg_bodytext = 'Anyone else starting to get the feeling that not even the writers have answers to the mysteries we want solved most?';
digg_media = 'news';
digg_topic = 'television';
"OK, that thing in the woods--maybe it's a monster, maybe it's a pissed-off giraffe. I don't know! The fact that no one is even looking for us, yeah, that's weird, but I just go along with it because I'm along for the ride! Good old fun-time Hurley! Well, guess what? Now I want some friggin' answers!"
Hurley was speaking for a whole bunch of Lost fans when he said that, and thanks to a strike-shortened Season Four (only eight episodes in the can) we're wondering just how many answers we're going to get. Unfortunately, we're pretty sure not even the writers have answers to the mysteries we want solved most ... or at least not good ones.
#5.
What's the deal with Walt?

Amid the ragtag team of survivors, somewhere between the quasi-superhero doctor and the background-dwelling Scott (or is it Steve?) on the screen time ladder, there used to be a small black kid named Walt. Several episodes early on hinted at mental powers allowing for everything from weather control to the ability to attract wild, often dangerous, animals with the power of his thoughts.
Later he returned in a vision, to provide the survivors of Flight 815 with important information through the somewhat dickish use of backwards talking.
At one time Walt seemed to be key to the fate of the survivors. Unfortunately for the show's producers, while time on the island moved at the leisurely pace of a month-or-two every season, the actor portraying Walt, Malcolm David Kelley, had this annoying tendency to age a full year with every calendar year that passed.
Walt in Season One, Season Two, and an artist's rendering of his projected appearance in Season Six.
The answer was to write Walt and his father, Michael, out of the show, which came to fruition when they boated into the wild blue yonder at the end of Season Two, leaving behind a whole pile of unanswered questions.
Some theories: In what is widely regarded as the most retarded of the fan theories, it has been speculated that Walt and Aaron, the recently born child of Claire, are both magical children and will prove to be the countering "dark" and "light" forces of the island. At first blush, the theory hangs together perfectly, especially since the black/white contrast has been prevalent throughout the show's run. However, we have since found a snag in this theory: through some diligent research, we have come to discover that not all black people are evil by default.
Also, Aaron's just a baby, and while pre-teens may not be the toughest sons-of-bitches in the world, if this struggle comes to pass, we're laying heavy money on Walt simply punting Aaron into submission.
Others think Walt can merely astral project himself (meaning he can have out-of-body experiences at will) as part of his magical superpowers. Though this does little to explain why his voice is a full octave lower with each appearance.
We're sorry, but if you were hoping for a non-magical answer to this one, you're probably out of luck. If you were looking for all your answers to come from sound science, try some other show, like CSI. OK, bad example.
Will They Tell Us? You'd better hope so, because Michael (played by Harold Perrineau) will be back for Season 4, and if Walt doesn't come with him, we can all look forward to another season of Michael looking disheveled and shouting "Walt!" several hundred times.
Of course, Walt returning doesn't in any way guarantee he'll bring answers with him. Don't be surprised if the writers spend all their time trying to explain why the supposed 10-year-old grows a fuller beard than Jack.
#4.
What's the deal with those first survivors who were kidnapped, and what do the Others want with them?

In the survivors' first days on the island, the evil natives (the "Others") infiltrated the group and formed a list of people to be kidnapped and dragged off into the wilderness for reasons which, we could only assume, were terrible and vile.
Later the survivors got a glimpse of some of the hostages being walked through the jungle, catching the feet of some of the children dangling a battered teddy bear (above).
Maybe we're just partial to all things list-related here at Cracked, but we really wanted to know what it was that earned those "lucky" few a spot on the kidnap list, and what the Others have been doing with them the past month-and-a-half. The producers seem profoundly less interested.
Some theories: Well, we know that some of the kidnapped have turned up with the Others, clean, unharmed and willingly cooperating with the bad guys. We know that for the show to make any damned sense at all, the kidnapped survivors have to have been brainwashed somehow, which almost guarantees that this is not going to be the actual explanation.
You may recall that when the show's hero, Jack, was being held in a cage by the Others, one of the kidnapped (Cindy the flight attendant), showed up outside the bars and managed to speak to Jack without revealing a blessed thing about where they've been kept or what the Others had done with them. This is mainly due to the show's usual technique of having characters in the middle of a profound mystery suddenly confront someone with all the answers, and then not bother to ask them a single relevant question.

This led to the ridiculous exchange where Jack screamed at Cindy to go away, and Cindy stared back in utter confusion at his reaction. So apparently the brainwashing eliminated the part of the brain that understands that people react badly to being locked in a freaking jungle cage. Anyway, as Cindy turns away we see the children that were glimpsed in the jungle earlier. To make sure we get it, they zoom in on the teddy bear.

Notice the bear looks as good as new (the leg isn't taped up any more). What the hell?
Will They Tell Us? It appears that Lost mysteries come in three flavors:
Mysteries that are never solved.
Mysteries that are solved and sort of make sense.
Mysteries that are solved and the solution is retarded.
We're going to speculate that this one will be number 3. The early glimpse of the Others and their hostages appears to have come at a time when the writers hadn't quite worked through what the "Others" were yet. Both the teddy bear in the jungle and Cindy's inexplicable reaction to seeing Jack in the cage have the feel of scenes that were included specifically to be baffling, purely to distract us from the fact that they hadn't really explained the last baffling thing.
#3.
What's the deal with Libby?

Nobody who watches Lost was accusing Libby of being overly sane as her relationship with Hurley developed in Season Two. While it could be argued Libby wasn't exactly a knockout, the fact remained that she looked like this:

And Hurley looked like this:

The first time she leaned in to kiss him, there was a part of us that was genuinely afraid she was in danger of becoming supper. That being said, there were few moments in the show's history that came as more of a shock then the slow pan to reveal that Libby, the purported psychologist, was in fact in the same mental hospital as Hurley as a patient. The Lost writers had tied another knot in the tale that fans were eager to untie.
Then Michael shot her. So, that was the end of that, we guess.
Or maybe not. To further complicate things, the producers had Libby show up in a pre-island flashback of another character (Desmond--she gives him the boat he would sail to the island).
Some theories: Some think Libby was working for Charles Widmore, Desmond's girlfriend's dad. The extent to how involved Libby is, and how many people she is responsible for sticking on the island, varies from wild theory to wild theory, but the consensus among all of them is that Widmore was responsible for her boat gift to Desmond, and damning him to a world of danger, confusion and sporadic bouts of nudity.
Will They Tell Us? The producers have hinted that we will soon learn more about Libby, and that we will do so through the flashbacks of another character, the latter of which could have gone without saying as we would imagine a Libby-centric episode would be far from sweeps gold due to her current inability to do anything which doesn't involve lying still and decomposing.
#2.
What's the deal with the four-toed statue?

So survivor and ex-Iraqi Special Forces member Sayid leads a sailboat on a stupendously unsuccessful ambush mission against the Others, and they come across the ankle-length remnants of an enormous statue. Sayid pondered if it was more disturbing that the rest of the statue was missing, or that the remaining foot was four-toed. It's the four-toed thing, we assure you.
Given that the statue earned a dramatic chord and a spot in the ever-lengthening "Previously on Lost" segment for the Season Two finale, it seemed that answers to what the statue was and who put it there were soon to follow.

It's yet to be mentioned on-screen since. Executive producers did see fit to acknowledge that it was a remnant of the island's prior inhabitants, though we find it hard to give them credit for that, since nobody in their right mind would assume it was from future inhabitants.
Some theories: Well, guess what. Some fans are speculating that time on the island moves in reverse, and the statue is in fact a remnant from the future when humans have evolved away that pesky little pinky toe. Supporters point to the apparently ageless Richard Alpert as evidence, who did not seem to age a day from a flashback episode that took place decades earlier:

They say the reverse-time even explains the frequent baby deaths on the island, as at a certain point uterus-time apparently just hangs a U-turn, causing the unborn fetuses to become unconceived and die.
Another, perhaps equally retarded theory is that the survivors crashed on one of the islands made famous in Greek mythology (specifically Homer's The Odyssey) in which references to four-toed natives are common. Therefore the whole thing may simply be one of the writers proving that he went to a private school growing up.
The most likely theory, one widely rejected by Lost fans, is that at some point in the past there was a sculptor who stepped back to admire the statue he'd spent three years carving, glanced down at the foot, squinted and said, "Oh, fuck me."
Will They Tell Us? Initially, promises were made by producers that the four-toed statue would be one of the many mysteries revealed in Season Three, so chances are good that it will at least be mentioned at some point in Season Four. If we had to guess, we'd imagine it'll happen shortly after the fate of everyone on the island is decided and our three biggest questions are answered in next week's episode.
#1.
What's the deal with the numbers?

4. 8. 15. 16. 23. 42.
If there's any certainty in the world of Lost, it's that when there's a number ready to make an appearance, you can be damn sure it's going to be one of those six. Ana Lucia's row on the plane? 42. The number of years Rousseau's signal's been transmitting? 16. Episodes between when we all started wanting Charlie to die, and when he actually did? 23.
The first pieces of the numbers puzzle were set in place for those fans with enough free time to engulf themselves in "The Lost Experience" (the network's online tie-in to the show). They were revealed to be the core values of the Valenzetti Equation, which predicted the end of humanity. While this revelation did provide the proper amount of additional confusion, it did very little to explain why the numbers turn up in dozens of completely unrelated places and their tendency to cause doom and destruction wherever they appear.

Some theories: This fan says the numbers don't actually mean anything, but were simply the means by which the island brought everyone to the island (they were Hurley's winning lotto numbers, the transmission of the numbers brought Danielle's boat there, and so on). The numbers exist, on their own, as their own evil entity. Like some sort of destructive devil in number form, that must be contained on the island and thus all who come across the number wind up there (or dead).
Whoa.
Will They Tell Us? We're going to say right now that if there is an explanation it is exactly as mystical and nonsensical as that. They've taken it too far for there to be any kind of answer that makes the viewer say, "Oh, now I get it!"
The writers just went to the numbers well too many times on this one. In addition to all the places you see the numbers on the island (etched onto doors and hatches, entered as a code in their computer, printed on random objects) before that they were muttered by a crazy guy in a mental hospital, appeared on the dash readouts in Hurley's car, showed up everywhere in connection with the doomed flight (Flight 815, boarding Gate 23), appeared on LAPD police cars and even on the backs of a huddled girl's soccer team Hurley randomly saw as he passed.
We probably shouldn't be surprised that one of the show's creators (Damon Lindelof) told a ComiCon audience, "We may never know what the numbers mean."
http://www.cracked.com/article_15838_six-musicians-with-pasts-they-hope-youll-forget.html

Labels: 5 Questions the Lost Writers Need to Answer (And Why They Won't)

SMILE, AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKui-PS2CGY

Labels: AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE, SMILE

8 Web Design Mistakes That Developers Make Yesterday
-->Filed in Website Building An excellent website takes a particularly savvy blend of both great design and great code. Because of this, you often find designers having to figure out code and developers trying their hand at design. Speaking as a developer who spent his university years studying among other developers, I can safely say that programmers are not designers. Thankfully, we were graded back then for having reusable code and proper OO methodology -- never for our aesthetics. But nowadays, one of the greatest assets a developer can have is a keen understanding of design.Now I understand that a programmer may never need to know anything about design (or for that matter, a designer doesn't ever need to program). But the truth is, every programmer has personal projects, frugal clients, or management roles that require design. Furthermore, I can say that often, a freelancer's greatest asset in pitching potential clients is their keen understanding of the entire website building process. So coming from someone who studied as a developer but now also does design (or at least attempts to), here are 8 mistakes I've either heard or made myself. "I Know What Looks Good (and I Have Photoshop)"It's one thing to be a bad designer. It's a far worse matter to be a bad designer and think that you're good. Every good designer has a well-calibrated "design compass" that comes from constantly looking at good designs. You need to spend time looking at great designs from sites like TheFWA, FaveUp, Design is Kinky, and my personal favorite, the Behance Network. You might also want to pick up the occasional design magazine like HOW or print (note that both are U.S. magazines and may be more expensive internationally). Just as good programmers enjoy looking at (and usually critiquing) other people's code, a good designer is always scanning other people's work, whether it be a website or billboard or menu. Without a good "design compass," no amount of Photoshop filters will save you. "Just Use Blue and White Again"Most programmers scoff at the idea that a designer might spend several hours choosing exact colors for a website. However, colors will always matter more than you think and you can't change them after a site is being built (at least, not without great effort). Like most things, looking at the color schemes of good designers will help, and the best place to look for color scheme ideas is COLOURlovers."I'll Just Center Everything"For most, it seems almost natural to center align titles, taglines, and parts of copy. But usually, centered text on a website looks amateurish, while left-aligning is a much safer and usually better looking option. Furthermore, be mathematically exact about your website sections, taking advantage of rulers and gridlines in Photoshop. This doesn't mean your design should look grid-like, but eyes can and will notice when sections are supposed to line up, but do not (especially with text). Every pixel matters."Use the Free Font...It Looks Fine to Me"There was a time in my life when (a) all serif fonts looked the same and (b) no font was worth paying for. I have since rescinded on both, and continue to learn more about the complex and beautiful world of typography. Honestly, if there was one subject I wish I could master, it would be typography. You can have a great website with only a little color and great type (and such is the basis for any great design anyways). Again, becoming better at typography requires reading and training your eye by looking at good sites. And please never categorize all fonts under either "fun" or "boring.""We Can Fit More Information in That Space"Having worked on both programming and design teams, a common disagreement between the two is "utility of space." Programmers want to get as much information above the fold as possible. Designers argue that the eye can't take that much and would rather just have a logo and tagline above the fold. Try finding a happy median between the two, knowing that (a) busy websites can be ineffective, (b) "whitespace" is not just a fallback for lazy designers, and (c) the so-called "empty" portions of a site are necessary to set off the other elements."I'm Not Paying for a Picture"Bad imagery/photography can ruin a reasonable site, while great imagery can make a simple design look really good. And with the resources on the web, there should be no excuse for using poor imagery. For non-commercial sites, check out stock.xchng or Flickr -- just make sure that the license behind the photo allows its use. For commercial work, there are multiple microstock websites out there like iStockPhoto (although learn to be creative because after a while, you start seeing the same images on other sites). And lastly, don't be scared to spend good money for the perfect image at a site like Veer."I Don't Need to Ask for Opinions"More often than not, you will be your design's biggest fan (through your rose-colored glasses). So you need to ask designers you know for an honest critique. Unfortunately, most people I know who've asked me what I think of their design just wanted approval, not critique. So let your ego go and put on your learning cap. There's a reason that these people are designers (and get paid for it) while you are not. Then after you get their feedback, respect them, trust them, and implement some changes."No Need to Get Too Detailed"Just like you can have mediocre code that needs improvement (but still "works"), you can have a design that is passable, but far from great. It's easy to look at great designs and think, "That doesn't look like much." But in reality, a great design takes a good deal of time (especially for new designers). But with these great designs, you only get to see the end product, and not the amount of editing and revisions that the designer went through. Furthermore, you'd be surprised how a detail as simple as a stroke line makes a world of difference. Don't ever consider a design "done" the first time you put the elements together. All in all, great design (like great code) takes time, patience, and skill -- and thus, should be duly respected. Although as a programmer or content writer or other web worker, you may never need to design a website, I have a feeling that at one point or another, you'll have to anyways. Hopefully, you won't make the above mistakes...

http://www.wakeuplater.com/website-building/8-web-design-mistakes-that-developers-make.aspx

Labels: 8 Web Design Mistakes That Developers Make Yesterday

A computer shop's sales pitch: 'We remove Vista'
After reading today's story about Windows Vista's first year, reader Bruce Finlayson of Seattle sent along this photo that he snapped in October outside a computer store in Milford, N.H. ...
I made some calls to computer stores in Milford (pop. 15,000) and confirmed that the sign appeared in the window of A&D Computer, across the street from the town square. Shop manager Aaron Kaplan said they were prompted to put it up because so many people were having problems with Windows Vista, including compatibility issues with older software and trouble adjusting to the interface.
"A lot of people didn't like using Vista, and a lot of the manufacturers forced people to go up to Vista," he said.
What was the demand for the service? "We had a lot of people coming in and asking about it," Kaplan said. "Of all the signs we put up there the last two years, at least, we probably got the most response out of that one. A lot of people coming in."
Kaplan said they've since replaced it with a different message, but they're thinking about putting the Vista removal message back up.
Posted by
document.writeln(showE2("toddbishop","seattlepi.com","Todd Bishop"))
Todd Bishop Todd Bishopat January 30, 2008 10:14 a.m.

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/130626.asp

Labels: A computer shop's sales pitch: 'We remove Vista'

Enterprise open source Toolkit

The infrastructure and tools required to make Linux a green operating system are now in place, according to Linus Torvalds, who was in Melbourne this week attending Australia's largest Linux conference.
In an interview at the linux.conf.au conference, Torvalds admitted that Linux was lagging behind on power-management and energy-diagnosis tools.
"It is an area we were pretty weak in a few years ago and just building up the infrastructure took a long time, but now we are at a point where we have most of it done," said Torvalds.
"That doesn't mean we are done. Now we have an infrastructure in place... we have the tools to measure power and notice when the power is higher and why that is, which is pretty important. Before, it used to be a black box," said Torvalds.
Linux safe with or without LinusSpeaking about the future of Linux, Torvalds said he is pleased that there is no more pressure on the kernel due to its stability and the community of people helping to keep it maintained.
"We are still working on a lot of stuff, especially with new hardware. But I think, on the whole, a lot of the basics are there. What we work on is better maintainability, improving code so we can add features more easily," Torvalds said.
Read this

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39292526,00.htm

Labels: The infrastructure and tools now in place

Scott Seigal was awakened one morning by a mobile phone text message.

It was from his girlfriend's mother.

His friends' parents have posted greetings on his MySpace page for all the world to see.

And his 72-year-old grandmother sends him online instant messages every day so they can better stay in touch while he is at university.

"It's nice that adults know some things,'' says Seigal, 18.

He especially likes instant messaging with his grandmother because he is "not a huge talker on the phone".

Increasingly, however, he and other young people are feeling uncomfortable about their elders encroaching on what many young adults and teenagers consider their technological space.

Long gone are the days when the average middle-aged adult did well to simply work a computer.

Now adults have Gmail, upload videos on YouTube, and show off the latest hi-tech gadgets.

Young people have responded, as they always have, by searching out the latest way to stay ahead in the race for technological know-how and cool.

They use Twitter, which allows blogging from one's mobile phone or BlackBerry, or Hulu.com, a site where they can download videos and TV programs.

They customise their mobile phones with various faceplates and ringtones.

And sometimes, they find ways to exclude adults – using high-frequency ringtones that teenagers can hear but most adults cannot, for instance.

Nowhere are the technological wars more apparent than on social networking sites, such as MySpace and Facebook, which went from being student-oriented to allowing adults outside the college ranks to join.

Gary Rudman, a California-based youth market researcher, has heard the complaints.

He regularly interviews young people who think it is "creepy" when an older person – we are talking someone they know – asks to join their social network as a "friend".

It means, among other things, that they can view each others' profiles and what they and their friends post.

"It would be like a 40-year-old attending the school formal," Rudman says. "It just doesn't work."

It is a particular problem for image-conscious teenagers, says Eric Kuhn, a university student who has blogged about the etiquette of social networking.

He accepted his mum's invitation to be Facebook friends and has, in turn, become online friends with other adults she knows.

But so far, he says, his 16-year-old sister has declined to add their mother "because she thinks it is not cool".

Lakeshia Poole, 24, said: "My Facebook self has become a watered-down version of me."

Worried about older adults snooping around, she is now more careful about what she posts and has also made her profile private, so only her online friends can see it.

"It's something of a catch-22, because now I'm hidden from the people I would really like to connect with," she says.

Lauren Auster-Gussman, a university student, says it is particularly awkward when one of her parents' friends asks to join her social network.

She thinks Facebook should only be used by people younger than, say, 40.

"I mean, I'm in university," she says.

"There are bound to be at least a few drunken pictures of me on Facebook, and I don't need my parents' friends seeing them."

There are ways around the problem.

It is possible on some sites, for instance, to limit what someone can see on your profile, though some users think it is a bother to have to deal with that.

"That is the beauty of Facebook and other online social networks. If you want to only interact with your peers, then you can adjust the settings to only allow that," says Katie Jones, a university student who has studied ways prospective students use Facebook to contact students at colleges and universities they are interested in attending.

It is also possible to simply decline or ignore an adult's request to be an online friend.

Or adults could back off and only use social networking to contact their own peers.

But it is not always so easy to relinquish that control, especially for parents of teenagers, says Kathryn Montgomery, the author of Generation Digital: Politics, Commerce and Childhood in the Age of the Internet and mother of a 14-year-old.

"As parents, we have to figure out where to draw the line between encouraging and allowing our teens to have autonomy, to experience their separate culture, and when we need to monitor their use of media," says Montgomery, a professor of communication at American University.

She says it is especially important to help young people understand that social networking is often more public than they think.

Sometimes monitoring them is the best way to do that.

Sue Frownfelter, a 46-year-old mother, thinks it is less of an issue for parents who discover technology with – or even before – their children.

Among other things, she has a blog, uses Twitter and has a Chumby, a personal internet device that displays anything from news and weather to photos and eBay auctions.

Her children, aged nine and 11, begged her to allow them to have a MySpace page, because she does.

Instead, she suggested Imbee.com, a social networking site for children that allows parental monitoring.

"I can't imagine my life without technology. It has truly become an extension of who I am and who my family will likely be," Frownfelter says.

http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=1651773728031114440

Labels: online world and the under-30s are not impressed., THE older generations are moving in on the hi-tech

ENVER — Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said Wednesday a Hillary Rodham Clinton presidency would be a step back to the past, turning her husband's image of a bridge to the future against her. The former first lady decried the tenor of his comments in an interview with The Associated Press.

"I know it is tempting _ after another presidency by a man named George Bush _ to simply turn back the clock, and to build a bridge back to the 20th century," the Illinois senator said in Denver.

"... It's not enough to say you'll be ready from Day One _ you have to be right from Day One," he added in unmistakable criticisms of Clinton, who often claims she's better prepared to govern, and her husband, who pledged during his own presidency to build a bridge to the 21st century.

Within hours, Hillary Clinton pushed back in an interview with the AP _ and got in her own dig.

"That certainly sounds audacious, but not hopeful," said Clinton, in a play on the title of Obama's book, "The Audacity of Hope." "It's not hopeful and it's not what we should be talking about in this campaign," said Clinton, suggesting Obama was abandoning the core of his campaign.

"I would certainly, through you, hope we could get back to talking about the issues, drawing the contrasts that are based in fact that have a connection to the American people," Clinton said.

In his speech, Obama depicted Clinton as a calculating, poll-tested divisive figure who will only inspire greater partisan divisions as she sides with Republicans on issues such as trade, the role of lobbyists in politics and national security. At the same time, he elevated McCain, fresh off victory in Florida's crucial primary, as the likely Republican nominee.

In the AP interview, Clinton vowed to take the high road and warned that voters in the mega-primaries next week expect that.

"I'm going to continue to talk to people about what we need to do in our country to try to lift people up, to keep focused on the future to be very specific about what I want to do as president because I want to be held accountable," she said.

Obama drew more than 10,000 people for his speech at the University of Denver. They packed a hockey arena and crammed into two overflow rooms and still were lined up outside to get in. Colorado is a caucus state, one of 22 to hold nominating contests Tuesday, and is one of a handful of states where the Obama campaign is predicting victory. Clinton has the advantage in several others, while several are still up for grabs.

"Democrats will win in November and build a majority in Congress not by nominating a candidate who will unite the other party against us, but by choosing one who can unite this country around a movement for change," Obama said, speaking as rival John Edwards was pulling out of the race in New Orleans, leaving a Clinton-Obama fight for the Democratic nomination.

"It is time for new leadership that understands the way to win a debate with John McCain or any Republican who is nominated is not by nominating someone who agreed with him on voting for the war in Iraq or who agreed with him in voting to give George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran, who agrees with him in embracing the Bush-Cheney policy of not talking to leaders we don't like, who actually differed with him by arguing for exceptions for torture before changing positions when the politics of the moment changed," Obama said.

"We need to offer the American people a clear contrast on national security, and when I am the nominee of the Democratic Party, that is exactly what I will do," he said.

The two rivals fought hard prior to the South Carolina primary, but the tenor has eased a bit since then.

"I've been trying to keep this on a level where the contrasts and comparisons are certainly fair, this is an election after all," said Clinton. "I've been trying very hard to set the right tone, to be focused on bringing the party together, bringing the country together but around specific goals."

Clinton spent her day in Little Rock, Ark., before heading to Atlanta for speeches to the Southern Baptist Convention and a major Democratic fundraiser. She took a colorful diversion on the trip to Atlanta, heading down the aisle of her campaign plane serving peach cobbler to reporters and staffers.

"I love anything peach," Clinton said.

Obama said he understands voters might feel some comfort at the idea of returning to another President Clinton after eight years of Bush. But he cautioned voters not to buy the argument that Clinton's experience is what the country needs.

"It is about the past versus the future," he said. "And when I am the nominee, the Republicans won't be able to make this election about the past.

"If you choose change, you will have a nominee who doesn't just tell people what they want to hear," Obama told them. "Poll-tested positions, calculated answers might be how Washington confronts challenges, but it's not how you overcome those challenges; it's not how you inspire our nation to come together behind a common purpose, and it's not what America needs right now. You need a candidate who will tell you the truth."

Later Wednesday, Obama gave a 10-minute talk by live broadcast to a joint meeting in Atlanta of four historically black Baptist denominations, where Clinton appeared later. These groups produced some of the most prominent civil rights leaders, including the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., whom Obama quoted.

"Pastors are pushing this movement forward," Obama said of his campaign, "and I need each and every one of you in this fight."

He asked the audience to imagine what it would mean for the country to see him with his hand on the Bible, taking the presidential oath of office.

"Our children will look at themselves differently and their possibilities differently. They'll look at each other differently," he said.

Clinton addressed the same group with a theme that aides described as a call for togetherness they contrasted with Obama's criticism. "Let us consider how we may spur one another to love and good deeds," Clinton said. She ended the day with a speech to a rowdy fundraising dinner.

"This has been a vigorous campaign," she said. "Whatever differences we have, they pale with the differences we have with Republicans."

___

Associated Press Writer Mike Glover reported from Atlanta.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/30/obama-says-clinton-would-_n_84023.html

Labels: Obama Says Clinton Would Be a Step Back

Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private plane carrying the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra touched down in Almaty, a ruggedly picturesque city in southeast Kazakhstan. Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: highly coveted deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Mr. Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap them.

Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.

Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent.

Mr. Nazarbayev walked away from the table with a propaganda coup, after Mr. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leader’s bid to head an international organization that monitors elections and supports democracy. Mr. Clinton’s public declaration undercut both American foreign policy and sharp criticism of Kazakhstan’s poor human rights record by, among others, Mr. Clinton’s wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

Within two days, corporate records show that Mr. Giustra also came up a winner when his company signed preliminary agreements giving it the right to buy into three uranium projects controlled by Kazakhstan’s state-owned uranium agency, Kazatomprom.

The monster deal stunned the mining industry, turning an unknown shell company into one of the world’s largest uranium producers in a transaction ultimately worth tens of millions of dollars to Mr. Giustra, analysts said.

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clinton’s charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustra’s more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clinton’s inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges.

Mr. Giustra was invited to accompany the former president to Almaty just as the financier was trying to seal a deal he had been negotiating for months.

In separate written responses, both men said Mr. Giustra traveled with Mr. Clinton to Kazakhstan, India and China to see first-hand the philanthropic work done by his foundation.

A spokesman for Mr. Clinton said the former president knew that Mr. Giustra had mining interests in Kazakhstan but was unaware of “any particular efforts” and did nothing to help. Mr. Giustra said he was there as an “observer only” and there was “no discussion” of the deal with Mr. Nazarbayev or Mr. Clinton.

But Moukhtar Dzhakishev, president of Kazatomprom, said in an interview that Mr. Giustra did discuss it, directly with the Kazakh president, and that his friendship with Mr. Clinton “of course made an impression.” Mr. Dzhakishev added that Kazatomprom chose to form a partnership with Mr. Giustra’s company based solely on the merits of its offer.

After The Times told Mr. Giustra that others said he had discussed the deal with Mr. Nazarbayev, Mr. Giustra responded that he “may well have mentioned my general interest in the Kazakhstan mining business to him, but I did not discuss the ongoing” efforts.

As Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign has intensified, Mr. Clinton has begun severing financial ties with Ronald W. Burkle, the supermarket magnate, and Vinod Gupta, the chairman of InfoUSA, to avoid any conflicts of interest. Those two men have harnessed the former president’s clout to expand their businesses while making the Clintons rich through partnership and consulting arrangements.

Mr. Clinton has vowed to continue raising money for his foundation if Mrs. Clinton is elected president, maintaining his connections with a wide network of philanthropic partners.

Mr. Giustra said that while his friendship with the former president “may have elevated my profile in the news media, it has not directly affected any of my business transactions.”

Mining colleagues and analysts agree it has not hurt. Neil MacDonald, the chief executive of a Canadian merchant bank that specializes in mining deals, said Mr. Giustra’s financial success was partly due to a “fantastic network” crowned by Mr. Clinton. “That’s a very solid relationship for him,” Mr. MacDonald said. “I’m sure it’s very much a two-way relationship because that’s the way Frank operates.”

Foreseeing Opportunities

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html?ex=1359522000&en=0a4d91ad9c46fe21&ei=5124&partner=digg&exprod=digg

Labels: After Mining Deal, Financier Donated to Clinton Charity

GAZA CITY, Jan 28 (IPS) - A stream of dark and putrid sludge snakes through Gaza’s streets. It is a noxious mix of human and animal waste. The stench is overwhelming. The occasional passer-by vomits.

Over recent days this has been a more common sight than the sale of food on the streets of Gaza, choked by a relentless Israeli siege.

Hundreds of thousands of Gazans, almost all of its able male adults among a population of 1.5 million, crossed over into Egypt last week to buy essential provisions – and a new lease of life. That has staved off starvation. But streets continue as sewers.

The rain has not helped. The sludge has spread, and the stench with it. Starved of timely income and essential supplies, municipal services have all but ceased.

"The smell," says Ayoub al-Saifi, 56, grimacing as he holds a handkerchief over his nose and mouth. "The stench of the sewage…my wife has asthma, and she can't breathe."

Saifi lives next to what has become a newly formed pool of waste. This used to be the street leading to home. "It's getting worse day by day," says neighbour Said Ammar, an engineer, and father of four.

The sewage treatment plant in al-Zaytoun neighbourhood in Gaza City requires 20,000 litres of fuel a day. Last week Israel ceased delivery of all fuel and supplies to Gaza. The consequences have been catastrophic.

Without fuel to pump it away, the waste backs up, flooding the streets and clogging the plumbing. The local ministry of health has declared this an environmental catastrophe.

Doctors have warned that a medical catastrophe could follow by way of spread of cholera and other diseases. That is at a time when not even life-saving medical services are on offer any more.

"We have to choose between cutting the electricity on babies in the maternity ward, cutting it to heart patients, or shutting down our operating rooms," says Dr. Mawia Hasaneen, director of emergency at al-Shifa Hospital, the largest in Gaza.

The World Health Organisation released a statement Jan. 22 warning of serious health difficulties arising in Gaza Strip, isolated by the Israeli siege, the Egyptian border and the Mediterranean Sea.

"Frequent electricity cuts and the limited power available to run hospital generators are of particular concern, as they disrupt the functioning of intensive care units, operating theatres, and emergency rooms," the WHO said. "In the central pharmacy, power shortages have interrupted refrigeration of perishable medical supplies, including vaccine."

Christine McNab, acting director in the communications department in Geneva adds that "our current concerns are about the supply of electricity to health facilities, the ability to move medical supplies into the region, and the ability of people to seek care outside of Gaza."

McNab notes that even if the full blockade is lifted, additional measures would need to be taken by the international community against any further disruptions.

Israel has blocked off fuel and supplies to Gaza because it says it faces rocket attacks from the Palestinian area, which elected Hamas, the Palestinian party that does not recognise Israel.

Official Israeli sources say that about 150 homemade rockets have been fired from Gaza into Israel since Israel commenced this latest raid. Two Israelis have been slightly wounded and several others treated for shock.

Israel has retaliated with firing from tanks and attacks by F-16 aircraft firing Hellfire missiles into Gaza's neighbourhoods. At least 76 Palestinians have been killed, and another 293 injured since Jan. 1, officials here say.

Through the suffering, many Palestinians still do not blame Hamas.

"Hamas has never been the problem. The occupation has always been the big problem," says Ammar. He instead blames Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who administers the West Bank Palestinian area, and who has been in talks with Israel.

"Abbas doesn't deserve one percent of the respect that (former Palestinian leader Ysser) Arafat earned. Israel will never find someone as good as Arafat. He gave them a historical chance at two states. Yet despite this, they (Israel) laid siege to him."

Rajaa Shalil, 38, and mother of four in Rafah at the Egyptian border, says "my respect for Hamas has increased more than ever. I love them for their empathy for the weak."

But not all of Gaza's residents feel this way. "Both Israel and Hamas are the reason for this," says resident Abu Mohammed. "Before, we were all in better conditions, but since Hamas took over Gaza they have been unable to handle it." (END/2008)
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40959

Labels: MIDEAST: Faeces Change the Face of Gaza