I am sure we have all asked ourselves this question at some point during our lives. The question "Is Santa Claus real" is common question that many children ponder at Christmas time. Even adults sometimes question whether the big man in the red suit and hat in the flying sleigh and reindeer truly exists. The answer I believe is yes, Santa Claus does exist.
There are a number of reasons why I have come to the conclusion that it is without doubt Santa Claus does exist. For example: The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) has a tradition of following or 'tracking' the progress of Santa Claus each Christmas Eve as the jolly man delivers presents to all the good boys and girls around the world. This tradition has been continued since the 1950's, although these days NORAD uses the Internet, Emails and advanced satellite radar technology to 'track' Santa Claus around the world on Christmas Eve and regularly posts his current location ever so often on the NORAD Tracks Santa website. www.noradtrackssanta.org
Another example why I believe Santa Claus exists is from reading a number of real Santa Claus Sighting stories posted by real believers who witnessed something magical on Christmas Eve. Please refer to the website links below:
http://paranormal.about.com/od/othermiracles/a/xmas_magic.htm
http://paranormal.about.com/od/othermiracles/a/Santa-Claus-Sightings.htm
Some of the stories prove that folk have been sighting truly magical events on Christmas Eve. Each of them must have been seeing something, Santa or no Santa. The story "Miracle On The Roof" really had me wondering about the existence or non-existence of Santa Claus. After reading the story and others, I have come to the conclusion that Santa Claus must exist. He is either a magical spirit (which would explain how he manages to enter homes without opening a door or through a home that has no chimney) or he possesses amazing inventions that are technologically advanced which allow Santa to be able to visit millions of homes all in one night.
I have had my own experiences on Christmas Eve where I thought I heard a noise on the roof or the sound or ringing bells as a child.
To all who believe in the spirit of Christmas and the magic and wonder that this time of years brings, I would encourage you to truly believe in the magic of Santa Claus and, if you desire to, on Christmas Eve leave out a plate of cookies and a glass of milk for Santa Claus to enjoy and perhaps a carrot for the reindeer. There is nothing wrong with believing in the magic of Christmas and the magical Christmas spirit that is Santa Claus. Believe. Always.
Merry Christmas.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
President Obama and his daily mail
President Obama has revealed on many occasions that he reads 10 letters every day that have been chosen by his staff from the thousands of letters, Emails and faxes that the White House receives each day addressed to the President. He is said to respond to around 3-4 of them each day. Here's two news articles detailing more information about the mail process in the White House below:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39974
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/31/politics/washingtonpost/main6350078.shtml
I myself have written a few letters and sent a couple of Emails each with a different but important subject or topic to the President addressed to the White House. Not suprisingly, I have received not one response, as probably have many others who have tried to send a meaningful letter to President Obama..and gotten no response or acknowledgement from either the man himself or from his staff.
Dont get me wrong, I believe it is great that any politician takes the time to listen to the views of their constituents. However, its a different story when it is used as a public relations tool. As the article mentions, newspapers have given the story of Obama reading 10 letters each day a fair amount of coverage. Its hard to tell exactly how the letters that reach the President's desk are chosen. Apparently they are chosen depending on whether it is reflected in the news (i.e. the state of the economy, debt, foreign policy, etc.) and whether its a meaningful message or not.
To give you an idea, its sort of like when your sort through your garbage and seperate the recyclables and the other trash. You pick all the recyclable items and put it in the recyle bin so they can be re-used because they are good enough to be re-used. The rest of the garbage just goes in another bin and is never seen or heard from again. That's just my assessment of how the mail sorting process works at the White House. Obviously you'd want the President to read the best of the best of the mail that is coming through each day. Right?
Since Obama only reads 10 letters a day (and only responds to about 3-4 of them a day anyway) you have to feel sorry for all the other people who take the time and spend their good hard earned money on postage to send a letter to the President and end up getting no response at all.
But then again I suppose people should be grateful that Obama takes the time to read his mail. Heck, I dont even know whether George W. Bush read any of his mail (particularly the one's from activists or protester groups and the like).
Overall, if you ask me your better off saving your time and effort and postage and writing to perhaps your local Congressman or Senator than to the President. At least when you right to your local political reps your more likely to actually get a response. Afterall, the President cannot attend to everyone's concerns. Then again, perhaps he should take more time to read more than just 10 letters a day. Why cant the President read more letters when he's on his lunch break or why cant he read a letter when drinking his morning coffee over breakfast?
If I was President or any politician for that matter, then I would always take the time to hear the concerns raised from my constituents, particularly if they go to all the effort to sit down and type a letter and send it through the mail. Heck, I would even read letters when i was on the can if it meant i got a real insight into what my constituents would be thinking or what is concerning them. Afterall, the public always comes first. I remember the old saying "the customer is always right". In this case the public is the customer and when the customer complains or compliments you, then you have to listen to the feedback and respond to the feedback.
I think the President in my view would be better off meeting people on the street, taking time to listen to what they are saying and have a good old chat, rather than sitting at a desk reading words on a couple pieces of paper which has been carefully considered among the hundreds of other pieces of mail before even reaching the President's desk.
But hey, if you want to write to the President by all means go for it. Perhaps you may be one of the lucky few who's letter or Email or Fax actually gets read by the President himself and who know's you may even be really lucky to get a response too, so good luck with that. You know the White House address and the website to send the President an email, so by all means if you want to write to the President and pray you get a response, then go for it.
Either way, all the best of luck to you. And thanks for reading this post.
Cheers. Mr. ?
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39974
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/31/politics/washingtonpost/main6350078.shtml
I myself have written a few letters and sent a couple of Emails each with a different but important subject or topic to the President addressed to the White House. Not suprisingly, I have received not one response, as probably have many others who have tried to send a meaningful letter to President Obama..and gotten no response or acknowledgement from either the man himself or from his staff.
Dont get me wrong, I believe it is great that any politician takes the time to listen to the views of their constituents. However, its a different story when it is used as a public relations tool. As the article mentions, newspapers have given the story of Obama reading 10 letters each day a fair amount of coverage. Its hard to tell exactly how the letters that reach the President's desk are chosen. Apparently they are chosen depending on whether it is reflected in the news (i.e. the state of the economy, debt, foreign policy, etc.) and whether its a meaningful message or not.
To give you an idea, its sort of like when your sort through your garbage and seperate the recyclables and the other trash. You pick all the recyclable items and put it in the recyle bin so they can be re-used because they are good enough to be re-used. The rest of the garbage just goes in another bin and is never seen or heard from again. That's just my assessment of how the mail sorting process works at the White House. Obviously you'd want the President to read the best of the best of the mail that is coming through each day. Right?
Since Obama only reads 10 letters a day (and only responds to about 3-4 of them a day anyway) you have to feel sorry for all the other people who take the time and spend their good hard earned money on postage to send a letter to the President and end up getting no response at all.
But then again I suppose people should be grateful that Obama takes the time to read his mail. Heck, I dont even know whether George W. Bush read any of his mail (particularly the one's from activists or protester groups and the like).
Overall, if you ask me your better off saving your time and effort and postage and writing to perhaps your local Congressman or Senator than to the President. At least when you right to your local political reps your more likely to actually get a response. Afterall, the President cannot attend to everyone's concerns. Then again, perhaps he should take more time to read more than just 10 letters a day. Why cant the President read more letters when he's on his lunch break or why cant he read a letter when drinking his morning coffee over breakfast?
If I was President or any politician for that matter, then I would always take the time to hear the concerns raised from my constituents, particularly if they go to all the effort to sit down and type a letter and send it through the mail. Heck, I would even read letters when i was on the can if it meant i got a real insight into what my constituents would be thinking or what is concerning them. Afterall, the public always comes first. I remember the old saying "the customer is always right". In this case the public is the customer and when the customer complains or compliments you, then you have to listen to the feedback and respond to the feedback.
I think the President in my view would be better off meeting people on the street, taking time to listen to what they are saying and have a good old chat, rather than sitting at a desk reading words on a couple pieces of paper which has been carefully considered among the hundreds of other pieces of mail before even reaching the President's desk.
But hey, if you want to write to the President by all means go for it. Perhaps you may be one of the lucky few who's letter or Email or Fax actually gets read by the President himself and who know's you may even be really lucky to get a response too, so good luck with that. You know the White House address and the website to send the President an email, so by all means if you want to write to the President and pray you get a response, then go for it.
Either way, all the best of luck to you. And thanks for reading this post.
Cheers. Mr. ?
Monday, January 31, 2011
Does the Freedom of Information Act still work?
If anyone is reading this, then your probably familiar with my older post back in 2009/10 on my blog in which I sent an Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) requesting records on myself just out of curiosity. Since then I have sent FOIA requests to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).
Not suprisingly, both requests resulted in a "neither confirm nor deny" response under the infamous Freedom of Information Act Exemptions. These exemptions are to act as 'safeguards' to protect information, which for example could affect things such as national security (Exemption 1) from being released if such information is properly classified and protected under an Executive Order from being released or the existence of which even be acknowledged (hence the "neither confirm nor deny" response which I have found out many FOIA requesters who publish their results on Internet forums and websites receive when requesting certain documents or records.
There are at least nine (9) Exemptions. These exemptions can be read in detail on the Wikipedia article for the Freedom of Information Act. Feel free to read, just follow this link (thank you Wikipedia by the way). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_States)
One of the things I and probably many people will know when filing a FOIA request is usually when you do happen to receive a response which is usually within the 20 days that is required under statute for the Agency or Department to respond, most of the time requests are protected from release under one of the nine exemptions, which can be frustrating particularly if you believe the information your requesting probably isnt interesting or worthy enough even to be restricted from release. This sort of thing has occurred more frequently post-Sept 11, 2001, which is fair enough if the information your requesting must remain protected from release.
But many I imagine have probably debated on forums and other websites about whether there is too much information is being overprotected from release. I think we all remember when President Obama in one of his first acts as President after being sworn in back in '09 released the Freedom of Information Act Memorandum which would encourage greater openess and transparency.
While the Memorandum may sound as sweet as sugar about encouraging openess and transparent government, if you take the time to look at most people's results of recent FOIA requests for information on a wide-range of topics and subjects, most of the time the request is denied under one of the exemptions or there is a "neither confirm nor deny the existence or non-existence" response, or even a "no records" response which is common with most FOIA requests sent to the FBI according to FOIA request results posted on the Internet.
I think many people who have sent an FOIA request and were unsuccessful would agree that perhaps its time for the U.S. Government to review the Freedom of Information Act and the 9 Exemptions. The reason would be to ensure that the FOIA is fulfilling its main function to ensure the "freedom" of information. To ensure that the public's right-to-know is fulfilled as often as possible.
Yes, it is true some information must be protected from release in order to protect national security, etc. etc. But there needs to be a proper balance between what information can be released and what cannot be released. Because without the freedom of information, then there is no freedom, is there? I think the public deserves greater access to information, careful greater access of course, but there should be greater disclosure and greater openess to more information I believe. Particularly if the release of such information is in the public interest and outweighs the need to keep the information from being released.
I hope in the future there will be greater openess and transparency and I hope the Freedom of Information Act will always be around to ensure that the "freedom" of information and the public's right-to-know will continue. I would like to believe that openess will always prevail over secrecy.
One of my favorite quotes about the freedom of information is by Abraham Lincoln. "Let the people know the facts, and the country will be safe." -- Abraham Lincoln
Thanks for reading this article. Cheers. Mr. ?
Not suprisingly, both requests resulted in a "neither confirm nor deny" response under the infamous Freedom of Information Act Exemptions. These exemptions are to act as 'safeguards' to protect information, which for example could affect things such as national security (Exemption 1) from being released if such information is properly classified and protected under an Executive Order from being released or the existence of which even be acknowledged (hence the "neither confirm nor deny" response which I have found out many FOIA requesters who publish their results on Internet forums and websites receive when requesting certain documents or records.
There are at least nine (9) Exemptions. These exemptions can be read in detail on the Wikipedia article for the Freedom of Information Act. Feel free to read, just follow this link (thank you Wikipedia by the way). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_States)
One of the things I and probably many people will know when filing a FOIA request is usually when you do happen to receive a response which is usually within the 20 days that is required under statute for the Agency or Department to respond, most of the time requests are protected from release under one of the nine exemptions, which can be frustrating particularly if you believe the information your requesting probably isnt interesting or worthy enough even to be restricted from release. This sort of thing has occurred more frequently post-Sept 11, 2001, which is fair enough if the information your requesting must remain protected from release.
But many I imagine have probably debated on forums and other websites about whether there is too much information is being overprotected from release. I think we all remember when President Obama in one of his first acts as President after being sworn in back in '09 released the Freedom of Information Act Memorandum which would encourage greater openess and transparency.
While the Memorandum may sound as sweet as sugar about encouraging openess and transparent government, if you take the time to look at most people's results of recent FOIA requests for information on a wide-range of topics and subjects, most of the time the request is denied under one of the exemptions or there is a "neither confirm nor deny the existence or non-existence" response, or even a "no records" response which is common with most FOIA requests sent to the FBI according to FOIA request results posted on the Internet.
I think many people who have sent an FOIA request and were unsuccessful would agree that perhaps its time for the U.S. Government to review the Freedom of Information Act and the 9 Exemptions. The reason would be to ensure that the FOIA is fulfilling its main function to ensure the "freedom" of information. To ensure that the public's right-to-know is fulfilled as often as possible.
Yes, it is true some information must be protected from release in order to protect national security, etc. etc. But there needs to be a proper balance between what information can be released and what cannot be released. Because without the freedom of information, then there is no freedom, is there? I think the public deserves greater access to information, careful greater access of course, but there should be greater disclosure and greater openess to more information I believe. Particularly if the release of such information is in the public interest and outweighs the need to keep the information from being released.
I hope in the future there will be greater openess and transparency and I hope the Freedom of Information Act will always be around to ensure that the "freedom" of information and the public's right-to-know will continue. I would like to believe that openess will always prevail over secrecy.
One of my favorite quotes about the freedom of information is by Abraham Lincoln. "Let the people know the facts, and the country will be safe." -- Abraham Lincoln
Thanks for reading this article. Cheers. Mr. ?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)