Archives for category: Justice

This Blog “The Philosopher on Politics has been combined with “A New Paradigm in Christian Thinking”.  All new Posts will appear on http://gadflyblog.com/ effective 12/12/2016.

Thanks for your interest in these topics.

The Philosopher

The Gad Fly ver. 1.2.1

The Philosopher

https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/gad-fly/

http://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/gad-fly/

7/20/2016

Copyright 2016

Definition of Gad Fly

  • A fly that bites livestock, especially a horsefly, warble fly, or bot-fly.
  • An annoying person, especially one who provokes others into action by criticism.

The Gad Fly of the Greek Democracy[i]

  • Plato refers to Socrates as the “gad fly” of the state (as the gad fly stings the horse into action, so Socrates stung various Athenians).

The Gad Fly of the Christian Church[ii]

A New Paradigm in Christian Thinkingis the gad fly of the Christian Church.  Christian Churches do not accept criticism, ever. The price of criticism in the Christian Church is excommunication.  Christian sees themselves as “birds of a feather” and a critical bird is not of their nest.  They must protect the income and salaries of the professional Christians, the minds of their youth and the minds of all of their members from the gad flies of the Christian Church. Professional Christians must preach to the choir, instructing them on the religion that they have chosen to put their faith.  The cost of not preaching to the choir is that the choir will vote with their feet and donations, resulting in a loss of income to the church and the professional Christians who probably have children – if Protestant – that they need to get through college and a mortgage to pay off.   If the professional Christians are Catholic, they will not meet with the approval of the hierarchy of the church and will be excommunicated.

Max Planck, the German nuclear physicist of the early twentieth century, stated, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.[iii]

The same statement can be made of religion.  Acceptance of a new viewpoint of the existing data on religion can only take place when a younger generation becomes comfortable with these new views and those who are adamantly opposed to these new views die off.

Because of this self-protection of the minds of the youths, the church is destined to disappear for failure to keep up with our knowledge of the universe and the light it has shined on our knowledge and purpose of the visit to planet Earth of the Representative of the Creator of the Universe (RoCoU) two thousand years ago, and taught how the Homo sapiens who have evolved over the past thousands of centuries can get their basic needs of food, clothing and shelter met on this planet Earth and how to live in peace with each other and other nations.

An interesting side note is that Paleoanthropologist has found no link to the evolution of the Homo sapiens skull to that of the evolved Ancient Man, leaving open the creation of the Homo species by the “Creator of the Universe”.  Although ancient man and modern man have identical bone structure from the neck on down, their skulls and thus brains are much different, nor is there any evidence of a transitional development from the skull of Ancient Man to the skull (Brain) of the Homo Species. [iv]

The advances in our knowledge of the universe and the life creation process in the last one hundred years, mainly due to the Hubble Telescope and advances in life science, have put the Christian Church in a position where they need to update their theology from religious to pragmatic (cause and effect, science) or face extinction.  The church is clearly in a positon of “grow or die” and the church cannot possibly grow with the determination to maintain their existing course, a course established and handed down through the generations and centuries by people that did not understand the meaning, instructions from the RoCoU and implications of the events that had taken place in the very beginning of “The Way” or the Christian Church.  These events took place in a very religious society and that society, for the most part, saw and recorded these events through a religious lens (perspective).

Case Study I

The RoCoU that visited planet Earth two thousand years ago taught the audience that had gathered around Him how to get along with other people on a one-on-one basis and how nations could live in peace with one another on a nation-to-nation basis.[v]

  • For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” [vi] From the accepted Christian perspective, their judgments will be judged by a higher power at the end of the life of planet Earth. They do not see their judging others as something that has immediate consequences.  From the pragmatic perspective, the effect of judging others – be it one-on-one or nation-to-nation – will have immediate consequences.  All Homo sapiens on planet Earth are of equal authority; one does not have dominion over another. And as one Homo sapien judges another, so in turn are they judged by those they are judging in real time by the same measure they are using to judge!This holds true for one nation to judge another nation. As one nation judges another, so is that nation judged, by the measure they use to judge, by the nation they are judging.  As in the case where the USA is judging ISIS with “air strikes,” the USA is being judged by ISIS attacking soft target (civilian targets, airplanes, restaurants, public places, etc.) with bombing and assault weapons.  The USA has judged ISIS as “barbaric” and ISIS, in turn, has judged the USA as “barbaric”.  This ISIS War has made it impossible to tell the Barbarians from the Barbarians.

Wars of our past have been mislabeled.  We must remember that the President of the USA is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the USA.  The orders given by the President must be followed by the USA military forces.  The President does not issue illegal orders.  If the President  orders it, it is a legal order and must be obeyed by those in subornation to the Commander-in-Chief.  One can argue that they do not have to follow an illegal order, but they will probably be sent to the brig while the Supreme Court reviews their case. They will be removed from and replaced from duty and someone else will carry out the Commander-in-Chief’s order.

Therefore the Civil War as we know it was not our civil war – it was  Lincoln’s War.  The USA involvement in WWII was FDR’s and Truman’s War.  Harry Truman was President when the Korean War began in 1950, and Dwight Eisenhower was elected in 1952 and was President when the armistice was signed in 1953.  The Vietnam War was JFK’s initiative and LBJ’s Bombing War; Nixon pulled USA troops out of Vietnam. The Serbia vs. Bosnia, Kosovo, NATO was Clinton’s war.  The Persian Gulf War I with Iraq was G.H.W. Bush’s War.  The Iraq War was G.W. Bush’s War and the ISIS-ISIL War is Obama’s War.

As a professional troubleshooter for over forty years, I can equivalently state that, “A problem must be accurately described before action is taken to try and solve the problem; if not, a bigger problem will be the result.”  By placing the proper labels on our past wars, we should gain some insight as to the right problem to solve.

The Right Problem to Solve

  • Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison.” [vii]

The term “workable compromise” was not coined until the twentieth century. Is it any wonder that our ancestors did not understand the meaning of the above instruction from the RoCoU during his visit to planet Earth two thousand years ago?  A workable Compromise is a solution to conflicts that work for all participants in the disagreement.  The first step in search of a workable compromise is to ask the conflicting subject, “What do you want?”  If one does not understand what the conflicting parties want, how can a resolution ever be found that works for the principle parties?

  • Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Won’t he first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace.[viii]

Here we have the workable compromise on a much larger scale.  In the case of USA vs. ISIS, the question was never asked, “What do you want?”  If we trace back the steps of the previous administrations, we should be able to predict what ISIS-ISIL wants.  The Sunni Muslims were in power in Iraq prior to G.W. Bush’s administration.  G.W. Bush’s War left the Sunni dispossessed from their homeland by the puppet Shiite Muslim administration installed by Bush. Iraq’s neighbor, Syria, was involved in its own civil war; The Sunni Muslims, now still armed with their weapons from the now defunct Iraq Red Army, seized the opportunity and developed their base of operation in Syria.  This new ISIL then made pronouncement on video, in a very barbaric way, for the USA to “Stay out of our fight.”  The Obama administration judged ISIL as “terrorists” and initiated air strikes against ISIS-ISIL as they threatened our allies in power in Iraq.

As described above in Case Study I, judging a nation as terrorist will result in the judging nation to be judged as terrorist by the judged nation.   As the USA conducted air strikes against “hard targets” (military targets) in an attempt to minimize collateral damage (civilian deaths), ISIS-ISIL, in retaliation, began bombing and assaulting soft targets (Civilian Targets).

Judging and the lack of ability to negotiate a workable compromise by the Obama administration has, and will continue to, cost the western civilization much cost in damage, dislocation of refugees and lives of civilians.  It is apparent that even a routine change in the administration by a newly elected administration will not end this conflict with ISIS-ISIL. A resignation or impeachment of the Chief Executive seems the proper road to pursue.  A newly elected administration would be in a position of trying to apologize for the actions of the previous administrations, and that never happens.

The Lens Used for the Viewing of the Facts

The lens one views the facts, events or evidence through determines the conclusions that the viewer will hold as the correct interpretation of the facts, events or evidence. The classic scenario is this: Two men who are walking in the woods come upon an immaculate garden, complete with trimmed hedges, flower garden arrangements, etc.   One man states, “There must be a caretaker for this place.” The other man states, “What a wonderful work of nature.”   The events that took place during the visit of the RoCoU two thousand years ago can be looked at through a religious lens or a pragmatic lens.

There are two and maybe three writers that were able to record the events, of the visit to Earth by the RoCoU and the events that took place, without looking though there religious lens.  Mark, who wrote the book of Mark in the Book of Books, the Bible, was a young man on the perimeter of the core group who became the Apostles of the RoCoU. He found himself in Rome where much persecution was taking place of the “Christians” in Rome.  He took it upon himself to record for the purpose of history the events that had taken place during his life.  He was an eyewitness to some of the events and received reports from those who were part of the core group of the RoCoU.  The style of writing for an historian is to answer the questions, “who, what, where and when.”   Luke, who wrote the books of Luke (Luke I) and Acts of the Apostles (Luke II), was contracted to record the events that had and were taking place in this time period. [ix]  Luke wrote under the guidelines of a journalist, answering “who, what, where and when.”  Luke was an eyewitness to many of the events that took place, he interviewed others who were eyewitnesses of events and he was an embedded journalist with the Apostle Paul on his missionary journeys.  Matthew was a tax collector and a Jew who made an argument to Jews of the authentication of the RoCoU to the Jewish religion.  He sometimes included the “why” in his writings, as did John in the book of John.  This would make their writing styles, “who, what, where, when and why” a little more difficult to sort out the facts from their interpretation of the facts and events that took place during this visit of the RoCoU.  The Apostle Paul was highly educated in Jewish religion and history.  He viewed our relationship with the RoCoU through the lens of Jewish religion and history.  A close examination of the writing of Paul will disclose that his view of the RoCoU’s visit to planet Earth was religious and the RoCoU’s view of his visit to earth was pragmatic and the next step in the evolution of the Homo species on planet Earth.

 The Gad Fly of the Democracy of the USA

The present day gad fly of democracy in the USA is The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, Retired.[x]  The Greeks invented democracy from scratch and it worked well for them for about 170 years.  The Greeks were on the peak of their Golden Age when they got tired of hearing their gad fly, Socrates, who was a critic of their society, in particular of the shortcomings and corruption in this democracy.  Socrates was one of the founders of western philosophy.  The Greek Senate charged Socrates with “corrupting the minds of the youth,” and they sentenced Socrates to death.  The death of Socrates was the beginning of the downfall of Greece, for they had lost their “guidepost.”

The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, like Socrates has been excommunicated from his position at a national laboratory by management that took offense to his proposals that threated their power structure.  His teaching credentials were canceled in a local church for “corrupting the minds of the youth” and not teaching the church’s official view on the subject. He was excommunicated from a church where he was a member in good standing for twenty years for publishing “A New Paradigm in Christian Thinking” [xi] and corrupting the minds of their youth and any other person in their church with science and philosophy.  Thank God for civil laws that protects our citizens from physical harm.

Our President has not chosen to listen to this gad fly, when he suggested that a workable compromise be initiated to resolve the conflict of space, control and authority in Iraq between the three different sects of Muslims. This was proposed by the Vice President, and now the reining authority in Syria has been added to the mix; he chose to put together a coalition of nations to wipe ISIS-ISIL from planet Earth.  ISIS-ISIL has retaliated with attacks against this coalition of nations and the USA hitting soft targets.  We should expect this activity to continue. The best outcome, using the best military forces on the planet,  for a military victory, will be guerilla warfare with the soft targets continuing to be hit by these guerilla fighters.  The only solution to the ISIS-ISIL conflict is a workable compromise – a permanent home for the displaced Sunni Muslims from their Iraq home.

Lessons from History

In 480 B.C. the Persians were set upon wiping the Greeks off the Earth or enslaving them.  The Persians greatly outnumbered the Greeks.  The Persians were under autocratic the rule of Xerxes; the Greeks were under democratic rule (one for all and all for one).   The Persians overran the Greek Spartans (trained warriors) at the pass of Thermopylae [xii] and sacked Athens, which had been evacuated by the Greeks.

The Persians had large war ships (similar to that of the USA navy, bigger than their opponents).  The Greeks built small maneuverable war ships with a torpedo like Ram on the bow of the ship (A trireme).  The Greeks lured the Persian navy in to the Aegean Sea where there were many islands presenting a maneuverable issue for the Persians.  With their mobility (like ISIS-ISIL), the Greeks ran circles around the larger Persian ships and rammed the Persian ships with their torpedo like Rams at the front of their ships and sank the Persian Fleet. [xiii]

Beware USA your large arsenal of weapons is being out maneuvered by an adversary who is focused on mobility.

The USA Transition from a Republic to a Democracy

The USA was formed as a republic and has been in a long transition to a democracy in small steps. This change has come about by allowing more of the population to vote in elections and it changed the way our President was elected.  In the beginning, only land owners could vote in the elections.  These were the people who had an invested interest in the profitability of the nation, much like that of stockholders voting in a corporation. [xiv]  The vote has slowly been extended, for various reasons, to other segments of our society who do not have an investment or knowledge of producing a profitable nation (women, teens, those on government assistance).  We certainly have improved on the lifestyles of our citizens, as have the Greeks, but our national debt is rising above our ability to pay the interest, which could eventually result in foreclosure on our property (nation) by our creditors (like the two bailouts of the Greeks by the EU in recent history).

The Life Span of a Democracy

The average lifespan for a democracy is about 170 years, as established by the Greeks.  In the Greek democracy, leaders were chosen by a lottery, thus minimizing payoffs and corruption in the government.  Serving as a leader was considered a duty of citizenship.  Ballots could be cast to remove a government leader from office and they would be exiled for ten years from their society. In the Greek democracy, only about 20 percent of the population could vote. [xv]   The Greeks now have more people on the government payroll than people paying taxes to support the government. Is this direction the USA wants to continue to pursue?

The Code of Conduct to Live Long in this Land

There is a “code of conduct” that was intended to provide for the continued success of a nation living long in the land that had been giving to them.  Unfortunately, these were given to a very religious people and they did not understand the economic implications of these Ten Codes of Conduct.  Unfortunately, these Ten Codes of Conduct are still seen as religious by almost our entire society, religious and secular alike.  When one sets aside their religious lens, the pragmatic lens shows that the economics of these Ten Codes of Conduct can be realized.  The original Codes of Conduct were given in an ancient language; therefore, the proper perspective is to look at them through the eyes of a parent giving instruction to their children so that they might live long in the land the parent was giving them to raise their generations.

  1. You will not listen to anyone but your father for guidance.
  2. You will not form addictions that will prevent you from making your own decisions.
  3. You will not use my name as an authority to cause trouble or discomfort for any other person on this planet Earth.
  4. You will take a day off, after every six days of work, and remember who gave you this land and enjoy your time with family and friends, and you will allow your employees time off to enjoy their family and friends, and you will not mow your lawn on this day and interrupt the peace of your neighbors.
  5. Remember what your mother and father taught you, and hand down those teaching to your children and grandchildren, that you might live long in this land I have given you.
  6. You shall not murder.
  7. You shall not steal.
  8. You shall not give false witness against your neighbor.
  9. You shall not seek an intimate relationship with your neighbor’s wife.
  10. You shall not scheme to gain possession of your neighbor’s property.
  11. You will not build a big mansion type house in your neighbor’s back yard.
  12. You shall keep the walk-ways, of your communities, free of “F oxtails” that injure our pets. [xvi]

QED

 

 

[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates

[ii] http://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/

[iii] Max Plank, http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/max_planck.html/

[iv] NOVA: Dawn of Humanity DVD, http://www.shoppbs.org/home/index.jsp/

[v] Jesus on judging, negotiating

[vi] Matthew 7:2, The Bible

[vii] Matthew 5:25, The Bible

[viii] Luke 14:31-32, The Bible

[ix] Luke 1:1-4, The Bible

[x] http://thephilosopheronpolitics.worpress.com/

[xi] http://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/

[xii] http://www.ancient.eu/thermopylae/

[xiii] National Geographic The Greeks DVD, 2016, http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/weaponswar/p/blpwtherm.htm/

[xiv] https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/voting/  TBC

[xv] PBS, “The Greeks”, 2016

[xvi] http://pets.webmd.com/dogs/foxtail-grass-and-your-dog/

The Colin Kaepernick Syndrome Ver. 1.0.2

The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, Retired

https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/Kaepernick-Syndrome/

2/9/2016

Copyright 2016

Definition

Colin Kaepernick is, or was, or may still be, the quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers football team for 2014-2017.  Colin came to the forefront of professional football when the then quarterback Alex Smith gave it his all to gain a first down by diving head first for the chain marker line.  Going head first made him an eligible runner and he received a concussion-producing blow to his head in a helmet-to-helmet collision.  The helmets are of no use in protecting the brain from colliding with its own skull, and when a collision causes rapid acceleration of the head, a severe concussion is the result.[i]

Colin Kaepernick brought some new talent to professional football; he could throw a fastball with the football, for he also was a pitcher in college baseball.  He could run like a gazelle.[ii]  These two talents helped Kaepernick lead the San Francisco 49ers to the Super Bowl.  Kaepernick was defeating the competition with his individual skill package.  He had only one flaw, and that flaw was carried over from his baseball pitching days – he occasionally threw a wild pitch.  In professional football, the cost of a wild throw is often an interception and a touchdown for the opposing team.

The other teams did not like being beaten by this new skillful quarterback and looked to find ways to “Shut Him Down!”  This is now to be known as “The Colin Kaepernick Syndrome.”  The opposing teams reorganized; they needed to give Kaepernick less time to throw the ball.  He was sacked more times than any other quarterback in the NFL in 2015.  He was not allowed to escape from the pocket and use his high speed running skills.  The opposing teams in the NFL shut Kaepernick down.  In 2015, Kaepernick was put back on the bench and a new quarterback emerged for the 49ers.  Too many “arm pumps” for his touchdowns in the end-zone may have contributed to his downfall; it does not pay to gloat over your successes against the other teams.

Case Study 1

I first became aware of this “Colin Kaepernick Syndrome” when I played basketball in high school.  I had read in a Boy Scout news article stating that if you knew where you were on the basketball court, you could practice shooting baskets from these positions and become skilled at making baskets from these identified positions.  I picked a few positions on the free-throw arc – today  known as the three-point range – and had a successful shooting average of over 70 percent from these positions (though in these days, this shot was worth only two points, not the three points given today).

In one game, during my sophomore year, my long term boyhood friend and teammate guard since junior high basketball was feeding me the ball as we faced a zone defense in our guard positions.   When I tossed the ball back to him at the other guard position, the defender who had been guarding me would move over to guard him.  He fed the ball back to me and I turned and shot “my shot.”  After completing three of these shots in succession, there came a BOOMING voice from the coach of the opposing team, saying “SHUT HIM DOWN!!!!!!” The next time my friend fed me the ball, I had to duck a haymaker swing from the farm boy who was guarding me, and I was double-teamed. They were on me “like white on rice.”

After college and once I was into my career in physics, I joined a health club and joined in on the pickup basketball games. Being one of the shortest players on the court, I had to learn how to deal with the other taller players.  I quickly received the handle as “The Gun,” as I did not miss a basket from the outside.  This resulted in a big guy always in front of me to block my shot.  Putting my knowledge of physics to use, I knew that a target could be hit without being able to see the target, like a projectile from an artillery weapon. Therefore, I only needed to know where on the court I was, as the basket is always in the same place. I could shoot the ball on a trajectory and it would always hit the unseen target.  Since these were really tall guys, the trajectory needed to be very high to get over their out-stretched arms as they jumped into the air to block my shot. This turned out to improve my shooting average, as the downward momentum of the ball from this high arching ball made the basket look bigger to the ball, as the downward momentum of the ball would put the ball through the basket, even if the rim of the basket was contacted. [iii]

When the Golden State Warriors were in the NBA Finals in 2015, Steph Curry was their consistent three-point shooter.  The opposing team reacted to his skill as an outside shooter by assigning a defender to him whose assignment was to keep a hand in Steph’s face when he had the ball, in an attempt to shut him down. I sent off an email to the Warriors outlining my “High Arching Shot, Shot Blindly like an Artillery Piece.” I missed the last game of this series, and do not know if Steph received my message, but the Warriors won the championship and Steph has improved on his performance in 2016.

Case Study 2

When I graduated from college with a Bachelor Degree in Mechanical Engineering Technology, Physics and Metallurgy, I accepted an offer to join the staff at a national scientific laboratory.  The first thing I heard from my new supervisor was, “We have never had anyone like you come to this laboratory before and we did not know how to classify you.”  So I was classified along with others who had much less education than I had and with supervisors of the same. Surviving  a “Reduction in Force” (RIF), working out of my field for three years, I entered into a classification that put me in direct competition, for salary, with others of this same classification, and still with both peers and management with less education than myself.

In one of our safety meetings, the supervisor brought in an incident that had happed in a different department.  This person put water in a glass beaker and put it into the microwave to bring it to a boil for tea.  When the tea bag was introduced to the water, the water exploded out of the beaker and scalded this individual.  I stated that, “Because the surface of the beaker was smooth, there was no place for nucleation to take place and the water had become superheated. When the tea bag was introduced to the water, it provided this nucleation point and a cascade of nucleation progressed rapidly throughout the beaker, causing a steam bubble that forced the scalding water out of the beaker and onto this individual, resulting in severe burns to the upper body.”  My peers, who were in competition with me to achieve a high ranking and thus a bigger piece of the wage pie, assailed my augment as crazy.  This incident was put under professional investigation and, a few weeks later at another safety meeting of my peers, the supervisor released the results of this investigation into the exploding water in the beaker. “The results of this investigation showed that, because the surface of the beaker was smooth, there was no place for nucleation to take place and the water had become superheated. When the tea bag was introduced to the water it provided this nucleation point and a cascade of nucleation progressed rapidly throughout the beaker, causing a steam bubble that forced the scalding water out of the beaker and onto this individual, resulting in severe burns to the upper body.”   This is clearly “The Colin Kaepernick Syndrome” in action.

Case Study 3

A few years later, at the turn into the twenty-first century, an incident occurred which involved our workspace being filled with dense toxic contact cement fumes. This was a high security Bay and was sealed off so tight a mouse could not get in to this Bay let alone fresh air! The visible ventilation fans in this very high celling bay could not bring fresh air into this area so the toxic fumes accumulated. This was a new team to this Bay and they were not familiar with this ventilation situation and they attempted to use floor model fans to move the air out of their immediate area and the toxic fumes accumulated in this entire Bay.  As the Safety Representative for this area, I confronted the team leader to his error in thinking and his actions taken trying to rid the fumes from his work area.  Again my solution to “move the units in front of a large local ventilation fan” was dismissed as CRAZY.  To achieve a high ranking and thus a bigger slice of the salary pie, one must accomplish the mission one is assigned, which does not include making errors in judgment along the way.  Is this ”The Colin Kaepernick Syndrome” in action?  Safety took a back seat to the competition for a bigger slice of the Salary Pie.

Case Study 4

I reported the above Case Study 3 incident to management and also reported my loss of being able to remember numbers.  The top manager asked me, “What was the first symptom to occur from this exposure to these toxic fumes?” I answered, “A loss of ability to make good decisions.”  He recognized the direct supervisor was on the scene of this incident and agreed that a lack of good decisions contributed to this industrial accident.

After living with a constant headache for two months, and after being charged with a couple of minor safety issues of my own, and being evaluated for a disability from this incident, I was directed to be evaluated for dismissal.  This may or may not have had something to do with my proposal to “Allow the Partial Participation in Management by the Rank-and-File,” as this proposal was based on the premise that “cooperation is better than competition” and threated the power structure of this management system.  The top supervisor accused me of trying to bring in a labor union and, on my exit, after thirty years of exemplary service to this organization, I received a deadpan wet dishrag handshake from both my direct supervisor and the top supervisor. This incident would also come under “The Colin Kaepernick Syndrome.”

The moral of this story: Never accept a position that puts you in competition for salary with peers and with management of lesser education than your own.

Conclusion

The Colin Kaepernick Syndrome” is real.  When in competition as a team, only team effort is acceptable for winning the game. Individual effort will be met with “Shut Him Down!!”  If your individual effort is beating the competition, don’t flaunt it in their face. Cooperation is better than competition in a group, even in the workplace, when this group is in competition with other groups.   

QED

[i] https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/football/

[ii] Coach Jim Harbaugh, San Francisco 49ers, 2014

[iii] https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/basketball/

Firstborns, Only Children and the Later Born Ver. 1.2.1

(Why Do First and Only Children, Always Get Voted the Most Likely to Succeed in Medicine, Science and Politics?)

The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, Retired

https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/adlerain-phy

1/7/2016

Copyright 2016

 

Introduction

The firstborn and the only child have some common personality and skill packages that give them a good chance of being successful in medicine, science and politics.  The personality characteristics of the only child can somewhat be considered like those of a super firstborn.  A short inventory of doctors, scientists and politicians reveals a significant population of firstborn and only children.  Only children come in two varieties: natural only child and functional only child.  The basic premises are that the only child grew up in their family of origin without the benefit of younger siblings to interact with.  Firstborns also come in different varieties: firstborn, firstborn male, and firstborn female, along with those who had at least five years separating them from their siblings.  Several of the past presidents of the USA were functional only children as shown in the chart.

Notable Leaders with Similar Families of Origin

Person of Interest Sibling Status[i] Leadership Roles
Abraham Lincoln Lost younger sibling at early age.  A functional only child. President of USA during Civil War.
Theodore Roosevelt Lost younger brother at early age.  A functional only child. President of USA, leader of The Rough Riders at San Juwan Hill.
Franklin D. Roosevelt Raised by his mother and grandmother. A functionally only child. President of USA for four terms.  Strengthened the US infrastructure.
Thomas Edison[ii] An only child. Early American inventor extraordinaire.
J. Edgar Hoover[iii] Older siblings greater than ten years.  A functional only child. Head of the FBI for 50 years.

 

 

Bill Clinton Raised up alone as a functional only child. President of the USA.
Barack Obama Raised up alone as a functional only child. President of the USA.

 

Dr. James Dobson[iv] An only child. Head of Focus on the Family.
Teaching Pastor [v] An only child. Leader and teacher of a local church.

Adlerian Psychology is the study of birth order and its relationship to personality characteristics.  The foremost author in the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century is Dr. Kevin Leman.[vi]  Below is his chart of firstborn personalities – the benefits and handicaps.

Traits of a Firstborn[vii]

Trait Positive Aspects Negative Aspects
Perfectionist Does everything well. Overly critical and dissatisfied with his own performance.
Driven Ambitious, headed for success. Always under great pressure.
Organized Able to stay on top of everything. No room in life for flexibility.
Scholarly Able to think problems through and solve them. Sometimes thinks too much; is overly serious.
List Maker Get things done; knows where he’s going. Boxes himself in; becomes a slave to his list.
Logical Avoids pitfalls of compulsive behavior. Knows he’s right even when he isn’t.
Leader Plays an important part in his family, community, etc. Expected to do too much; always leaned on by others.
Compliant Known as a good guy. Known as an easy mark.
Aggressive Gets ahead in life; others look up to him. Tends to be selfish and to disregard the feelings of others.

 

Traits of Only Children [viii] (Super Firstborns)

Trait Positive Aspects Negative Aspects
Uncompromising Gets what they want. Others do not get what they want.
Communication Style “I want” this and “I want” that. Others do not get what they want.
Controlling Must be in control of all situations. Others are left out of participating in the solutions.
Must be the leader Natural take charge leaders. Cannot follow some else’s lead.

 

 

In charge of their life Knows where they are going. Does not always know how to get where they want to go or accept nontraditional methods.
Trusts in Tradition Steady guiding force of the proven whether successful or not; trusts the existing paradigm. Not receptive to out-of-the-box thinking; will reject a new paradigm.
Non-Negotiator They get what they want. No experience in negotiating a “Workable Compromise” with another sibling.
Successful against all odds As their mother or grandmother said, “They can be anything they want to be.” Good examples of “The Peter Principle” (promoted above their capabilities).
“Most important person on the planet” High Self-Esteem. They hear this from birth until the death of their parents. They never grow out of this and continue to think they are the most important person on the planet.
Prefers being around mature adults Associates with the more wise, from experience, adults Misses out with having fun with their peers.

 

Discussion

The largest difference between the Firstborn in the family and the Only-Child is their interaction and competition for their parent attention with their siblings.  The Firstborn with siblings is often put in charge of the younger siblings and develops leadership skills and a sensitivity to the feelings of their siblings.  They are often responsible for organizing the games they will play together and setting the rules of the games.  The Firstborns will develop a parental role towards their younger siblings looking after them and protecting them.  This will usually manifest itself in a “Tell Assertive” communicative style where they usually assert themselves by telling other what to do.   It’s little wonder that this family pecking order is reestablished in the workplace.  The Only-Child misses out on these interactions with siblings; this could be a natural or a functional Only-Child (one who lost their siblings early in life or was isolated from them in different ways) and comes into the workforce with a individualistic communication style (It’s all about me).

To meet the demands of their younger siblings, the Firstborn must learn the art of “negotiating workable compromises”, the Only-Child is not afforded this opportunity.  The Only-Child has no competition for their parent attention and is often made to think they are the most important person on the planet (which from their parents point of view they are the most important person on the planet).  The Firstborn has this position of being the most important person on the planet for a short period of time until the second child is born.  They get read to sleep at night and spend time alone with their parents for this short time, than the competition arrives and their exclusive access to their parents change and the amount of time the parents can focus on each child changes.  This can be shown experimentally by examining the forensic evidence in the family photo album.  There one can find many photos of the Firstborn alone, but the rest of the siblings are photographed with “The Gang” with the exception of the Lastborn who gets some individual attention from their parents when their siblings have left the nest.

The Middleborn

The middle kids usually develop good negotiating skills, they have had to establish “Their Space” between an older sibling and a younger sibling and keeping the peace between the older and younger sibling especially if all are the same sex.  This negotiating skill will manifest itself in an “Ask Assertive” communication style where they learn how to maintain control and the peace by asking questions to assert themselves over their siblings and coworkers.  They often find themselves in middle management positions keeping the peace between those running the organization, the firstborns, and the lastborn workers.   The middle-born child often tries to get through live without being noticed, they are just part of “The Gang” [ix]

The Lastborn

The Lastborn grows up with almost everything laid out for them by their older siblings and parents and they come into the workforce looking to be directed by others in the workforce.  They often want their own ‘Freedom’ but once on their own find it difficult to manage their affairs to keep them solvent.  They tend to be more sociable than their older siblings and an easy mark for being taken advantage of in adulthood. [x]   Probably from their social nature, the Sales Force seems to be disproportionately populated with the Lastborns in their family of origin, and comedians and philosophers are also well represented by the Lastborns (Anything to get out of doing real work).

Personal Experience in Adlerian Psychology

At a national science laboratory platform speakers club, I once had the podium in an impromptu speaking session.  The meeting was held in a large conference room holding over a dozen people.  I asked the members of this speakers club if they were the firstborns in their families of origin.  All the people in the room, except for me, raised their hand indicating they were the firstborns in their families.  I performed a similar experiment in a study group at a local church again with about a dozen members.  I asked how many men in this class had an older brother.  Ninety percent of the men raised their hands.  I then asked how many women in this class were the oldest in their family of origin, and found that eighty percent of the men with older brothers came to class with their firstborn wives!  At another church where I had previously been a member and knew several men in this church, I asked if they had an older brother. Their answers were “yes.” Even the young preacher had an older brother.  Does this mean that ninety percent of men who are involved with the mission of a church have an older brother?  I asked the young preacher if his older brother went into the field of science, he replied in the affirmative.  Does this writer have an older brother?  Yes.  He is ten years older; that would qualify this writer as a functional only child.  Is this writer involved with the mission of the church?  This is the same writer of the blog: http://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/.

The Case of DNA

Does DNA play a role in our personality traits and skill packages?  In a recent program on PBS, the latest developments of DNA science were disclosed and revealed that our DNA changes with our experience, so as we learn new skills (and knowledge), our DNA changes to reflect these additions to our skill packages.  Therefore, when the parents, who are young and inexperienced, have their first children, the DNA passed down to these first children will be different than the DNA passed down to later children because the DNA of the parents have changed with their adult experiences.  All of the children in a family will then receive different skill packages from the same parents.

Conclusion

Why Do First and Only Children, Always Get Voted the Most Likely to Succeed in Medicine, Science and Politics?  Because of their innate knowledge from their parent’s DNA, the Environmental knowledge from their family of origin, getting praise for their academic achievements, being placed in leadership roles in their family of origin, firstborn’s develop skills of leadership, academic achievers, organizers and they pay close attention to the details.  Ditto the only-child but more intense, more controlling, very high level of self-esteem (They can be anything they want to be” (mom/grandmother).

This may explain the data showing that our sales force is composed mostly of lastborns, middle management is populated with Middleborns, and the younger of two brothers are involved with a church mission with their firstborn wife.

QED

 

[i] http://deadpresidents.tumblr.com/post/15457991558/which-presidents-were-the-oldest-child-the

[ii] PBS 2015

[iii] ibid

[iv] Personal information

[v] ibid

[vi] http://drleman.com

[vii] Dr. Kevin Leman, “The First Born Advantage” Revell pub., 2008, P 69

[viii] Personal observations while working with the USA’s Best of the Best at a national science Laboratory and a local church

[ix] http://drleman.com

[x] Luke 15:11-24

The Solution to World Peace Ver. 1.2.0

The Philosopher

http://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/mirror-image/

12/4/2015

Copyright 2015

 

The Mirror Image of Christianity

In a recent broadcast by “Frontline” on PBS, interviews and strategies of ISIS were shown.  The ISIS strategy is to make Islam the world religion and the use of arms will be used to bring about this change in the world’s societies.  Their children start the education process as young as four years old.  If they are old enough to manage the use of a handgun, they qualify for training as an ISIS Evangelist.  The youth are indoctrinated into the ISIS theology and, as they are able, taught how to use more sophisticated weapons to accomplish the ISIS mission.  This ISIS doctrine is to do what God wants them to do and that is to make Islam the world religion.  They live their lives to please God.

Christianity

Take out the weapons and what is left is the mirror image of Christianity.  Or can we take out the weapons?  Christians no longer use just simple handguns or even machine guns; they use war planes to conduct highly accurate air strikes against the so called “Terrorist.”  Putting a label on someone to dehumanize them is the first step in genocide operations.  As ISIS uses simple weapons like knives, IUDs and automatic weapons on “soft targets” (unarmed civilian targets), the Christian nations employ their advanced weapons against “hard targets” (those of military interests).  ISIS then responds with more attacks on soft targets.  The Christian nations respond with more air strikes.  Around and around we go in this never ending “Do Loop” (a computer programing term for a program that continually repeats itself with a “Do” command).  But the Christians are doing what they think God wants them to do and they are living their lives to please God; a mirror image of ISIS.

Case Study

For an example of putting their belief in pleasing God as preeminent over their relationships with others of God’s children, see the recordings of events in the journals of Luke in Chapter 5 of the Book of Acts of the Apostles in the Book of Books, The Bible.  A short synopsis of this event was that the Apostles were in the process of establishing a socialist organization that would take care of the poor and widows among them.  Peter, the leader of the Apostles in this time period, demanded that everyone contribute their resources to this socialist cause.  When a husband and wife team had sold their property and only given the Apostles a portion of the proceeds from this sale of their capitalist profits, Peter publically renounced them one by one as sinning against God.  Both of the members of this capitalist team died on the spot, probably from heart failure at being accused of sinning against God.  Peter erroneously put living his life to please God over the lives of the other children of God.  This same phenomenon of putting their worship of God over their relationship with other of God’s children can still be observed in the Christian societies all over the world.

Where to Go from Here

Commentators are suggesting the Christian nations send in ground troops to wipe ISIS off the map, but ISIS theology is now all over the map.  They want ISIS to flee, but flee to where?  ISIS has its beginnings from those who were disenfranchised from their homeland in Iraq by the puppet government the Christian nations put in place after the removal of the existing government in Iraq. The invasion of Iraq by Christian nations is now considered, by some national crises troubleshooters, as the stupidest foreign policy that has ever been put forth by these Christian nations.  We may not like what some of these national dictators do in their own countries, but it is not our business to put these dictators out of business by the use of our military forces.  The way that Jesus taught to take care of these issues was by prayer and oratory, teaching them about the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

The Founding Fathers of the USA went to great lengths to ensure that religious organizations did not have political power or the use of the military forces to accomplish their religious goals. There is a long tradition of a fuzzy line between church and state to ensure that religions cannot force people into their religious beliefs.  However, in the exercise of our political power in international relations, we helped establish a religious nation and helped to arm them to the level of a nuclear nation, making a religious nation with political and military power.  We called this new nation Israel.

This new nation based on religion upset the balance to power in this region.  When this region was under the Ottoman Empire before World War I, the Ottoman Empire had undergone a culture revolution similar to the French and English culture revolutions.  The Sultan had advocated and people were allowed to choose their own destiny.  Several ethnic groups: Jews, Turks, Arabs, Palestinians, etc. resided in this area for centuries and had learned to live together in a somewhat harmonious state.  Difficulties in this area resulted from the Russians purging the Jews from Russia.  Some of these Jews immigrated to their ancient homeland and upset the balance of power and harmony in this area.  The new immigrants from Russian not only did not know how to farm in this new climate, as it was much different than the farming in Russia, but they did not know how to relate to the other ethnic groups who had lived in this land for centuries.  Turmoil was the result of these new Jewish immigrants into their ancient homeland.  After World War II, the Christian nations chose to make this ancient homeland of the Jews their own officially recognized nation.  The turmoil in this region continues into the first quarter of the twenty-first century, as there is now a religious nation armed to keep this land to themselves and exclude the other ethnic groups who also claim this land as their ancient homeland.

The Solution to Peace in the World

As long as we continue to pit religion against religion, the best we going to end up with is a continued argument about whose religion and whose God we serve.  A close look at the teachings of Jesus shows that He was indeed ahead of His time.  He knew more about science than all the scientists now on Earth.  We are still in our infancy in learning what Jesus already knew.  He just could not teach all that He knew to a people that could not yet understand his teachings.  A college professor does not enter into a lecture hall and teach their students all that they know.  No, they teach their students what they think they are capable of understanding at that point in time.   Anyone who has studied and been involved in one of the applied science should recognize that Jesus was teaching the people of his day about applied science.

There is an axiom in philosophy that states that, “Once you have chosen who to ask the question, you have already determined the answer.”  If you ask a religious person like the Apostle Paul about the Gospel of Jesus, you are going to get a religious answer, because Paul was an exceptional authority on Jewish religion.  If you ask a present day applied scientist about the Gospel of Jesus, he probably would answer in scientific terms.

Experimental Science has only been around for about four hundred years.  Experimental Science is the science that proves or disproves Theoretical Science theories. Experimental Science was introduced into the world by Galileo, who used his handmade telescope to produce data that proved the Copernican heliocentric theory, that the Earth rotated about the Sun and not the contrary that the official church subscribed to.  Galileo’s reward for this discovery by the church, which had political power, was life imprisonment, which was relegated to house arrest for the five remaining years of his life.  Applied Science is the science that applies what we have learned about science to solving the problems and issues of the day and has grown into the technology that is all about us in this first quarter of the twenty-first century.

It is of no wonder that the people that Jesus was teaching about applied science could not comprehend what was being taught to them; the Applied Sciences had not yet been discovered by man.  As has been the case all through the history of man, man has made a religion out of things and events when he did not understand the supporting science.  An astrophysicist said, “Science tells you the truth whether you like it or not”.  Religion is something one chooses to believe, this can be caused by many various reasons, including: coercion, inheritance, crowd psychology, social pressures, family pressures, a means of saying in business and earning a living, indoctrination from youth, or evangelized by circumstances and oratory arguments.

The solution to peace in the world then seems obvious: teach the world about the science behind the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (or your Personal Counselor as Jesus called the Holy Spirit).

QED

We got Trouble, Trouble, Trouble, Right here in the U.S.A., It starts
“I-W-Y-L” and that stands for “I Win, You Lose” ver. 1.0.1
The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, Retired
https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/I-win-you-lose

    4/9/2015

The police forces of the U.S.A. are retaining officers with the attitude that “I win, you lose”. This attitude has made the news in recent events where the officers clearly had this attitude that they were going to win and the alleged suspect is going to lose. It has shown up in Fergusson, Missouri, Chicago, Illinois, and North Charleston, S.C. There are several possibilities for the origin of this attitude of “I win, you lose,” for this attitude has been observed in many circumstances many times.

    Communication Styles:

Communication professionals have identified four different styles of communication and actions: “I win, you lose,” “I win, you win,” “You win, I lose,” and “You win, I lose, but I will get you back.” These styles are also identified by names: Aggressive, Assertive, Submissive, and Passive Aggressive. These styles of communication have also been labeled: Parent to Child, Adult to Adult, Child to Parent, and Loser to Winner. These styles of communication have been characterized as: Tyrant, Adult, Door Mat, and Snake-in-the-Grass.

    The Origin of I Win You Lose:

Psychology has chimed in on this situation of “I win, you lose” origins. Adlerian Psychologist has attributed these tendencies of aggression to their family of origin. For example, the older of two brothers, close in age, could produce a male with aggressive tendencies in the older male developing the “I win, you lose” attitude. The younger brother, having experienced bulling from his older brother, will have the tendency to bully others as well, thinking this is how to treat other people. Therefore, these aggressive “I win, you lose” tendencies could have their roots in the family of origin.

    Military training is all about “I win, you lose.” The transition from being taught to destroy an enemy (“I win, you lose”) in the military to “I win, you win” in civilian life is not always an easy transition to make. We could see many of our war veterans, struggling with this transition to civilian life; it is not easy to reeducate one’s communication style once indoctrinated into an aggressive style, or any of the other dysfunctional styles, of communicating with others.
    The environment that one grows up in can influence their communications and actions. Even one’s formative years in grade school and high school is often shaped by their teachers, who have this “I win, you lose” attitude. If this is how we are going to train our children, can we really expect them to grow up and invent their own assertive “I win, you win” communication style which will precede their actions towards others?

Some of us then send or have sent our children to Sunday school, where hopefully they will learn how to relate to others as equals. But, even in church setting, this writer has witnessed “I win, you lose” attitudes. It seems as if our missions in life can take precedent over our relations with others.

    Maturity:

C. G. Jung observed a change in men’s lives between the ages of 35 to 39 years. Working with the general population, he surveyed men of various ages and in this survey he asked them one question: “Is God important in your life?” He received responses like, “God has no meaning in my life” to “God is the most important person in my life.” He plotted this data on an X-Y Cartesian coordinate graph. The results were nothing short of amazing; there was a huge spike in the curve between the ages of 35 and 39 years where the responses changed from God having no influence to God being the most important person. Therefore, it can be concluded that men will often see a transition in their life during this mid-life time period. It could prove to be a very interesting follow-up study to see if these men who transitioned from God having no influence to God being the most important” attended Sunday school in their youth.

We are What We Fight Against:

    Psychologists have also observed that a person will become like what they are fighting against. For our police officers, this is a warning sign. In order for our police officers to maintain their perspective, they need to be associated with a group of people who are not fighting against the behavior that our police officers see every day. If our police officers associate mainly with other police officers, it will be difficult for all the officers to maintain the proper perspective about other people, and a culture of “I win, you lose” can spread throughout the police force.

      The Solution to “I Win, You Lose”:

    It appears that the most effective change we could make in our police forces is to require our officers of the law to participate with a group of people that see a more friendly side of life in our society, such as a church, a charitable nonprofit organization, or a club with charitable objectives. The basic premise for these types of programs can be found in Paul’s writings in I Corinthians Chapter 13 that ends with verse 13: “And these three remain, Faith, Hope, and Love/Charity, but the greatest of these is love/Charity”.
    QED

The Shooting in Ferguson, Missouri Ver. 1.0.0

https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/

11/28/2014

The people, who are demonstrating against not indicting the officer for the death of one of their own, may have a legitimate complaint.  According to the officers own testimony, “He shot at a retreating suspect” an act, at least in California, is forbidding by the law.  Once a threat to your life has turned into retreat, you cannot shoot at this fleeing suspect as they are no longer a threat to your life.  The Grand Jury in this case probably did not know of this law and the Prosecutor in the case did not inform the Grand Jury of this law, or Missouri does not have a law regarding the shooting at a “Retreating Threat”.  Whatever the case may be the Justice System in Missouri appears to be broken.

It looks to this Philosopher that this is a case of differing attitudes.  The Victim’s attitude is that “I know the law and you cannot shoot at me if I am retreating”.  The Police Officer’s attitude is “I win-You lose”.

The demonstrators say that our justice system is broken.  As one who has served on one shooting incident jury, I could not agree more.  My conclusion after serving on this jury is that “I hope I never have to come before a Jury”.

In this case that I served on, a couple of decades ago, some of the Jurors would have convicted this person, not for what he had done, but for who he appeared to be “a member of a gang”.   They were instructed to find this person guilty of something by the Judge in the case because he carried a concealed weapon illegally; therefore, “Self-Defense” was not an option.  With these instructions from the Judge, the accused was either guilty of something he confessed to doing or he was not guilty of something he confessed to doing.    In this case the two neighborhood gangs, actually just a group of friends of different ethnicity, met at a street corner near the victim’s and his friends’ homes.  The gang of friends of the suspects group thought they were going to a gun fight, the gang of friends of the victims thought they were going to a knife fight.  When the Victim ended up chasing the Accused with a large Butterfly knife, the Accused pulled the concealed hand gun from his waist band and fired at the pursuing knife wilding Victim, unfortunately hitting the Victim in the heart along with two peripheral wounds.

Since the two or three preceding ballots, taken no later than our arrival in the Jury Room by this Jury Panel resulted in eleven “Guilty” of something votes and one “Undecided” vote.  And since I had earlier in my answers to the ADA, disclosed that I had formed a neighbor gang in my youth and after high school we had joined larger gangs known as the US Marine Corps, Army, Navy and Air Force and known to one female Juror to be a member of a national laboratory known for its close attention to details, she tried to have me removed from the Jury Panel as being biased to the Accused.  When asked by the Jury Chairman what I thought about this, I stated that “I did not think I was the one with a problem”.  Several of the other Jurors agreed with me.  The female making the removal request recanted and asked that she not be removed from the Jury panel and she would not show prejudice anymore.  I think, since it was Friday and all wanted to be done with this Jury responsibly and return to their own lives next Monday, they allowed her to stay on the Jury Panel.

After I had led a reviewing through the scenario that had taken place on that day of this terrible loss of a young seventeen year olds life, It became evident to me that there was enough responsibly for the death of this young man to go around.   The young man had earlier in the day consumed a six pack of beer with a couple of friends.  Who sold this minor the beer?  The young man was still a minor and needed the supervision of his parents; his father was more interested in watching daytime television than in supervising his son.  His son owned and was in the possession of knives with blades that exceeded the legal limit in form and function.  The suspect was a new immigrant exile of only a few years from a war torn country, where carrying a weapon was probably normal behavior, the suspect most likely new more of our laws from watching Western Movies than from actual classroom instructions.  Is our own Immigration Department responsible for not instructing new immigrants on the laws of our land?  We allow these new immigrants to live among us when they are more likely to behave according to what was “Normal Behavior” in their country of origin than in the laws of the USA.  In the end we, the Taxpayers, “foot the bill” to incarcerate people who should have been taught the laws of our land by the Immigration Department.

When the “Shooting in Fergusson, Missouri” demonstrators say that our Justice system is broken, based on my personal experience in the Jury system, I could not agree more.

Next case: “Death by Cell Phone” A young Black Male Twelve Year Old is in the park playing with his toy gun pointing it at people, who mostly ignored him, with one exception.  A woman calls 911 on her cell phone and reports the incident stating “She didn’t know if the gun was real or not”.  This doubt did not reach the police that responded to her call and when the twelve year old was ordered to raise his hands and instead reached for his waist band, where he had his toy gun, he was shot dead by the police.  Total time of the shooting after the police arrived in their squad car, about two seconds.

It will be interesting to see how this case unfolds.  Was the young Black Make responding to the news reports of the shooting in Fergusson, Missouri?  Was this young man under the supervision of his parents?  What role did the breakdown in communications play in this incident?  Do we have too close a connection, with our cell phones, to the Police for our own good?  Do we set in motion a panic, with our cell phones that result in a tragedy to a family? I’m sure the news rooms will keep us informed of the results of this incident.  Hopefully we will not have a mass revolution on our hands to deal with these injustices.