Nuclear Proliferation Treaty of 1968

“The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was an agreement signed in 1968 by several of the major nuclear and non-nuclear powers that pledged their cooperation in stemming the spread of nuclear technology.”

This is a very serious matter. The more nations with this kind of capability increases the risk of world-wide destruction. It is no surprise, nations want this kind of power. It is also no surprise that there are many, many nations that make it their duty to prevent this from happening. The reality is, that nations that don’t already have it, shouldn’t have it. It is a case of being careful of what you wish for. It could ultimately lead to the destruction of that nation. I believe that world maps could be changed over this. Not for oil, land, or natural resources; but, to prevent the spread of the nuclear threat. I believe that nuclear technology is the single greatest man-made threat, to humans and animals alike. All nations should be very concerned.

Some might say, why get vaccinated. It is better to go out and mingle with the germs and develop an immunity that way (naturally).

It is true that people who have animals, or live on a farm will have more advanced immune systems; than, a person in a more sterile environment. There is something to be said about that.

There are some viruses and bacteria that are more virulent (very severe or harmful in their effects). Mingling with these, without prior protective measures, can be catastrophic to your health.

That is what vaccinations are for. Your still ‘mingling’ with the pathogen, but in a safer manner, and in a lasting way. An attenuated vaccine, is one where the pathogen is structurally changed to make it harmless or less virulent; while at the same time, keeping the antigenic properties.  The antigens create an antibody response (triggers your body to develop the immunity it needs to prevent the infection) – this is called active immunity. There is also an inactivated vaccine (where there is no live pathogen). Otherwise, you are rolling the dice – am I going to develop a degree of immunity: or am I going to contract polio, or am I going to contract small pox, or am I going to contract tetanus, etc.

Buz Acronyms for the season: FLOTUS, POTUS, AND SCOTUS

dum_dee_dah_cat1.gifUh huh. Tell me all about it.

united states 2united states.png

I saw a post stating that a blue lives matter flag is being said to be racist. I think there are too many flags. Stick with the good ol red, white and blue. The other stuff is just getting more and more divisive.

After thinking about this for a while, here are a few thoughts on this matter:

What the group is currently about and what the goals are is not known; however, on the surface; yes, black lives do matter.

Remembering the first days this came out – There was a group addressing the leaders of law enforcement regarding black lives matter. The group was told that all lives matter. Hello. The group was not there to discuss all lives. At that point in time, it was about black lives. How hard would it have been to say, “Yes, black lives do matter …. Telling that group that all lives matter, only served to dismiss or dilute the groups concerns.

Certainly this post is not intended to disparage the police force. This is intended to bring out that, the leadership missed the mark on this one.  The people in blue should look out for each other, and have each others back. The demands of the job, demand it. There is a line that cannot be crossed, however. Most officers and law enforcement leadership realize this. The leadership should own the actions of a few bad apples. They should work to correct the problem(s) and not attempt to preserve the bad apples.

This is a little after the fact, since it hasn’t been in the news lately (that’s been noticed). It’s just that I haven’t heard anyone bring this point out. The news on television made it sound like anyone who said that black lives matter, was off-base. That is not the case.


Welch’s (family farmer owned) Grape – It contains 7% juice. We were in the mood for grape juice and picked this up thinking it would be good to drink. It doesn’t have a bad taste and tastes very sweet.

What’s the deal with this drink, though? It claims family farmer owned. It sounds like a marketing ploy to me. If it were family farmer owned, I don’t think it would have sucralose in a non-dietary drink. They have all the sugar, plus the sucralose: High fructose corn syrup , “natural flavor” (that sounds like a joke), red 40, and sucralose (this is not an all-inclusive listing). The nutritional facts show total carbs 34 grams and sugars 33 grams. With this much sugar, why is the sucralose added? Hello.

‘The drink with lots of stuff bad for you, but drink it anyway’, should be added to the label – High fructose corn syrup has recently been frowned upon, there is literature out there saying sucralose is bad for you, and I don’t think red 40 is that great either. Farmer owned my butt. They are either not farm owned, or sold out to big business that deals with artificial sweeteners.

Frankly, if it is not going to be natural, it shouldn’t be connected, in any way, to farmers. Why give farmers a bad name? I’ve seen adds for artificial sweeteners: Nature didn’t make it but it was made from nature. Sure, you can say that about the atom bomb. If nature didn’t make it, it will take a bit of selling before I’ll eat or drink it.

Anyway, why such the proliferation of artificial sweeteners. They are being put in everything, even combined with a lot of real sugars. I’ll bet the stock market futures on artificial sweeteners is taking off, big time. Next time, I’m going to check the label before buying. Full disclosure, though, this isn’t the first time ‘they’ tricked me.

Rawganic vegan – /

silly animated gif

Is it just me, or is security at the White House sorely lacking.

Another person scaled the wall and made it to the building. Hello. This is the most important building in the United States, with the most important person in the country residing within.

When the United States goes on a mission to destroy something, there is no effective defense; but, when it comes to defending a perimeter; well, we are simply negligent, in my opinion.

Some years ago, one of our mighty ships was blasted, killing many sleeping soldiers. Was this a major attack? No. It was a small (as far as I know) boat that we simply let drive straight into it.  The ships personnel could see any object heading for the ship from miles away. What were the scenario’s here – Joy riders heading straight for the ship? People wanting to commit suicide by running the boat into the ship? The steering was out and they had a collision course with the ship? What do you do in any of those scenarios? You are responsible for that ship and the warriors within; so, you blast the boat out of the water, before it crashes into the ship. To me, it is a no brainer.

What do you do when someone with a back pack or some group goes over the White House fence, and makes for the White House where the president is? You take them out with extreme prejudice, and ask questions later. People have to anticipate the unthinkable. Failure to do that … If I were in charge of protecting the White House and the President; I would have enough fire power behind the scenes to stop an army. Certainly a person with a back pack would be taken out, before he made it 10 feet. Maybe I watch too much television. If a lay person could make it to the white house like that, what if an organized group who knew what they were doing went in? People should know that it is a suicide mission. Being  ‘nice guys,’ gets people killed.


While perusing an MSN article on some food myths regarding foods that are thought to be bad for you, but aren’t as bad as is touted; I came across this food chart. This chart is to gauge different types of fish, based on the number of servings. It’s interesting. Click on the hyperlink.

Fish chart


I don’t always set out to influence news agencies, but when I do, I have to put my foot down.


So China has created a man-made island, on the ocean. Will this create a rush to claim ocean space?

If the ocean were a hard surface, we all know it would have been claimed. Just as continents have countries and territories; so to, would the oceans. Now that this Jeanie has been let out of the bottle, will there be a rush to claim more parts of the ocean?

Might makes right – I predict that those countries that are big enough and strong enough, have the technology, and think future, will lay claim to ocean real estate.

China’s man-made island is causing problems; however, I am sure new treaties or such will be worked out. My opinions on this are unqualified. I know nothing of international relationships. I do love interacting with people from other countries. I made friends with a couple of visiting doctors from Saudi Arabia once. I showed them around San Antonio Texas, a little. I have a great respect for China, Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia … I like to watch Chinese and Korean movies and television programs, in the original languages (English written at the bottom of the screen). I think somewhere along the line I was a Korean person re-incarnated – maybe during the early Joseon period.

korean-movie      roof-top-prince

While watching these shows, it struck me. People around the world are more alike, than one would think. I know people who I would say have Chinese and Korean counter parts – they look so much alike. I learned one thing – I can’t learn a language just by listening to it. I pick up a few words and phrases. The people at our favorite Chinese restaurant are patient with me. They let me try out some of the Chinese words I picked up. I’m half Italian and can’t speak that language any better. Oh, well. Perhaps in another life I’ll be motivated to learn these languages early on 🙂

Anyway, I believe intercontinental relations have reached a point, where the international water surface can be divided up. Having Islands in the middle of the ocean would benefit shipping, if you ask me. Stranded ships wouldn’t be so stranded. There might be an island near by (foreign or domestic) to quickly help out. With the increasing populations, farming islands could even pop up ??

The possibilities of the future are awesome.


OK. What is so hard about instituting nation wide protocols for new mental health diagnoses, or even strong suspicion on mental health issues. There usually are warning signs, to indicate if someone is going to spontaneously combust!

In the last instance of a shooting in an air port – According to reports, the man sought out help for his mental illness. Hello! Is anyone out there! What is so hard about instituting national protocol for taking certain actions on a newly diagnosed or suspected mental illness. You really can’t blame the people who took care of this person. They are programmed to handle situations in a certain way, and may very well not think outside the box. This is just what protocols, guidelines, policies, and procedures are for. These care givers need protocols for handling certain situations, and patients.  It is common sense stuff. I remember a person in a mental health ward. At that time I was thinking to myself: Man, if this person ever got a hold of a gun – ‘forget about it.’ The sorry situation is, that this person might be able to obtain one if on the streets.

I couldn’t believe that anyone with a license to carry a gun could bring one on a plane, to begin with. Hello! Does anyone realize how many people have a gun license? At any given time, what is the percentage of these people who could spontaneously combust? Again, common sense. If a person has a compulsion to take his gun to his destination, mail it to himself/herself and it will be there. This was a situation waiting to happen. These are situations we should be able to control, but we haven’t even evolved enough to do that. The venue for this could have been anywhere, however. It doesn’t matter where. The fact is, this person should have been cared for properly and followed by mental health professionals; as well as, having the weapons taken away. Again – Hello?