Shocking news: Mermaids don’t exist...zombies neither.

Mermaids don’t exist, says the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). If that news disappoints you, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), announced, last month, that zombies don’t exist, either.

Now, for me, these news items were a little surprising – not, you understand for their content, but for the fact that they were thought necessary.

NOAA released their denial of the existence of mermaids to counter an upwelling of belief in them, after a recent Animal Planet TV show: “Mermaids: the body found”. Apparently, the computerized imagery showing mermaids, in this show, had convinced some viewers that mermaids were real.  In response, NOAA said: “No evidence of aquatic humanoids has ever been found”.

So, too, the CDC denial of the existence of zombies presumably comes in the wake of a case in which a man, apparently high on some sort of drug, ate the face of a homeless man, in rather zombie like behaviour. The CDC declared: “CDC does not know of a virus or condition that would reanimate the dead (or one that would present zombie-like symptoms).”

Both of these announcements gave me great pause. It is true to say that they are enough, in themselves, to turn one’s world upside down. Of course, that is not because one might be disappointed to learn that mermaids don’t exist and that zombies are entirely fictional. It is quite simply because of the sheer implicit dumbness of the American people that would require these scientific bodies to make such announcements. How dumb must the population be, to be convinced of the existence of mermaids, or the truth of zombies? How dumb must these people be, to live in fear of a “zombie apocalypse”...as some apparently do?

We live in paradoxical times. Whilst educational opportunities, in general, may be better than at any other time in history, for the average person, we are also confronted with the sheer stupidity of many modern people. Somehow, despite the opportunity to learn and a considerable apparatus to do so, in almost all the world’s countries, people still insist on being dumber than your average brick.

Particularly worrisome about this is the fact that both these announcements came from American scientific bodies. This is very much suggestive that America, in particular, may be suffering from a surfeit of dumb people in its population. Could this be because American education has declined in recent decades? Is the average person leaving High School unable to distinguish reality and fiction to the extent that they need to be told, via official announcements that the stuff of mere stories – mermaids and zombies – do not exist in real life?

Modern civilization is upheld, not by the average person, nor by the believers in zombies, or mermaids, but by the intellectually gifted. Relatively few people know how the apparatus of science, technology, engineering, architecture and medicine work. It is on such people that the structure of society rests. Without them, society would be on the level of the zombie believers. That would be the true “zombie apocalypse”.

The situation led me to wonder why our scientific bodies don’t devote more energies to educating the public. What if, instead of having to deny the existence of fairy tales, they could use the mass media to educate the general public about science, technology and the world? The only problem with this, of course, is whether the mass media would even carry such stories.

Sometimes I do find myself agreeing with Ainan’s sombre view of the future of Humanity. He thinks we are in for a general decline in civilization, in the coming century. He sees signs of it in the general decay of public consciousness and in the disregard for the future, shown by our “leaders” (think, for instance, of the general inaction on global warming). He doesn’t yet know about the zombie/mermaid believers. I don’t expect it will fill him with any more hope to hear it.

I do hope Ainan is wrong on this point. I would like civilization to climb to ever higher levels. Yet, then I hear stories like this one. It is a worry.

Clearly, what is needed to address this is for education standards to be raised to the level at which, at least, people are able to distinguish reality and fiction. Is that too much to ask?

Posted by Valentine Cawley

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.) 

IQ tests for all Presidential candidates, please.

It is time for American politicians – indeed, I suggest all politicians seeking high office – to have mandatory IQ tests administered to them. This would save America – or indeed any other nation – from electing that particular breed of charming, persuasive, self-confident, but ultimately empty headed type that politics too often seems to attract. (I am sure you can think of a few who fit that description, without me naming them). Such mental lightweights do not have the cognitive resources to make the best decisions, or to think with a long term enough vision, to guide any nation to long term security, success, growth and stability.

So, I propose that an independent, international body be established to administer IQ tests to all current or prospective politicians, of all nationalities. I am sure that there would be some interesting revelations were such an examination to be performed. This IQ information should be made publicly available, and be searchable online. It should also be reported in the mass media. Were this to be done, I am sure there would be very interesting consequences. The electorate would have to hold, in its collective mind, a measurement of the basic mental capacities of each candidate. The electorate would also have to make a judgement as to whether a particular level of cognitive capacity was enough for the job. Though, of course, there could be a mandatory minimum level imposed. In such a world, a politician who was dumber than the base threshold – say an IQ of 130, perhaps – would be debarred from being a politician at all. However, it would be probably be more interesting – though perhaps less safe for the country – to leave that decision up to the collective mind of the electorate (though the IQ of that, is not particularly high).

A system of mandatory IQ tests for all prospective politicians, particularly for Presidential candidates, would allow for much greater understanding of the true intellectual power of the people in question. Until now, the intellectual reputations of politicians, particularly Presidential candidates, have been established through canny media campaigns, which resemble consumer goods branding exercises i.e. the statements and promises made often bear no relation to reality or truth. The campaign for Senator Barack Obama’s run for Presidency is a case in point. The media made him out to be a genius of the highest order. He was praised for an intellectual power that was deemed unprecedented. I saw absurdly high estimates of his IQ floating around...ones that would have made him among the smartest of people anywhere. Yet, a close look at the intellectual achievements of his life, reveals a perturbing thinness of evidence. If he is truly a great intellect, he hasn’t done much to show it. In fact, he has done less to show it than many men of fairly average intellect do. This does seem to suggest that his true intellect, is actually much closer to that fairly average impression. For instance, he became President of Harvard Law Review, essentially through affirmative action by all appearances. (For those of my readers who are not familiar with “affirmative action”, this is the practice of selecting people on the basis of race, not merit, or innate ability. Typically in such “affirmative action programmes”, the threshold for a minority race applicant is much, much lower than for a majority race applicant. This leads to obvious problems with the performance of such people, on the job.) Now, as President of Harvard Law Review, one would have thought that there would have emerged from the young Barack Obama, a fount of articles, to be published in its previously august pages...not so. The young Barack Obama published nothing in the Harvard Law Review, apart, perhaps, from his own name. It seems that was the extent of his writing abilities at the time. This fact is very strong evidence that the young Barack Obama was short on both ideas and writing ability. Both facts are not indicators of any high degree of intelligence. Yet, still, the media made him out to be some kind of genius for being “the first black President of the Harvard Law Review”. In actual fact, his conduct as President of the Harvard Law Review reveals a very modest intelligence at work.

The most effective way to stop the mass media being used to create false impressions of the intelligence of candidates is for their IQs to be made publicly known, having been verified by an independent body, external to the United States, with no ties to any one competing nation. Perhaps this could be an all nation effort under the UN.

Were President Obama’s IQ made known, I really think there would be a lot of surprise in many quarters. For the first time, people would have objective knowledge of the quality of his mind – and I am certain that his supporters will be very disappointed by what that objective measurement reveals. However, it would be unfair to imply that President Obama, alone, is probably not as bright as his “genius” marketing made him out to be. It is just that, in his case, the disparity between legend and truth is likely to be greater than for most other politicians. This is partly because his intelligence has been exaggerated more – and partly because he is probably not as bright as certain other recent politicians, despite all the positive press about his mental powers (as if he were some sort of Marvel Superhero).

Other politicians, too, would surprise the electorate by the essential mediocrity of their minds. This is a good surprise, for the people deserve to know the quality of the people they are electing. Some might think that it is enough to know where someone was educated, to gain an indication of their intelligence. This is fallacious thinking because it assumes that all candidates for admission are treated in the same way. They are not. Some politicians – indeed, many – come from very privileged backgrounds and gained admission to prestigious schools on the basis of family connections and the wish for said institutions to curry favour with their families – or repay old benefactions and the like. So, admission to a prestigious school, for people of such privileged background, may be no indicator of talent at all. However, it is an indicator of a kind of political influence, which is not the same thing.

Another point to bear in mind: a person’s educational history bears the same correlation to their innate intelligence, as does their appearance. This correlation is 0.381, if I remember correctly. Thus, candidates boasting about their education, is no more significant than saying: “I have got a pretty face!”.

No. The only way to settle all the uncertainty about the mental abilities of political candidates is for them ALL to have MANDATORY IQ tests performed, under controlled, observed, videoed conditions (to prevent cheating), by an independent body. Until then, politicians will do what they always do: lie about their intelligence and abilities to convince the electorate that they have some special, or at least adequate, ability to govern.

That being said, if anyone has any inside knowledge about the IQ of any politician please comment below, with your evidence and source. Thank you.

Posted by Valentine Cawley

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

Barack Obama and Mitt Romney's tax plans.

Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have both promised tax cuts, if elected, that sound delicious to the voter’s ears. Barack Obama has said he will cut corporate taxes from 35% to 28%. He has also said he will maintain the Bush era tax cuts for most voters, and raise taxes on those earning 250,000 dollars a year and more. Mitt Romney on the other hand, rather more adventurously, has promised to cut all individual tax rates by 20% - and to cut corporation tax to just 25%. Now, my question is: are these two men sane?

There is a profound problem with the idea that broad ranging tax cuts are possible in America, at this time. America, as the whole world knows, is deeply in debt. Indeed, its debt is so large that it would take many years to conquer it, with wide ranging tax INCREASES, and cuts to all government funded public services. It is simple not possible to cut taxes, as offered by Obama and Romney, and maintain existing services. Should either of these tax plans be implemented then one of two things would happen: the American debt burden would grow rapidly – or all publicly funded services would have to be dramatically cut, to balance the books. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are making seductive promises to the electorate, which simply cannot be kept, without destroying America as a nation. Now, there is the real meaning of these promises: both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney would be prepared to destroy America, just to get elected.

America needs to cut public spending, and/or raise taxes, if it is to reduce its debt burden. This is the unavoidable truth. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney clearly believe that the American electorate is dumb...and perhaps they are right. They are certainly banking on the dumbness of the American people to get them elected, since what they are promising cannot be delivered without imperilling the United States itself.

I am hoping that the American electorate is bright enough to see the essential problem with promising significant tax cuts in an era of unprecedented national debt. It would be rash in the extreme to do so. Promising to do so, can only mean one thing – that the politician would do anything, absolutely anything, including bankrupt his own nation, just to get elected. What the American people need to do is pause for a while and reflect on whether they really want a politician like that, at the helm of their nation. By making such promises, both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, reveal themselves to be dangerously unelectable. Should they be elected, the safety and long term security of the United States would be imperilled (if they keep their promises and are able to make them happen).

If any candidate wishes to promise significant tax cuts, they should also identify which public services they are going to cut, and by how much. The full truth needs to be declared. It is meaningless for a candidate to promise massive tax cuts, without also explaining how the budget will be balanced. It would also be very revealing if they do not intend to balance the budget, for that would be a plan to increase America’s debt burden...and that, now, at over 15 trillion dollars, is beyond the point at which it would be safe to increase it further.

So, remember this: Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, by declaring such fantastic, even delusional tax cutting plans, are declaring that they would bankrupt America, if it meant they could get elected again. I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t want either of them in charge of my country. Would you?

Posted by Valentine Cawley

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

The USA Debt Ceiling and Democracy's failure

There is a lesson in the wrangling between the Democrats and the Republicans, Obama and John Boehner, over how to tackle the USA’s astonishing debt crisis. The lesson is a simple one: democracy doesn’t always work. Now, that might seem a disturbing statement, but the juvenile antics emerging from America, on the debt crisis, do not provide any evidence as to democracy’s effectiveness – and much evidence to the contrary.

Watching the deadlock between the two ideologically opposed foes, of Democrats and Republicans; watching Obama reveal his essential lack of power, as his overtures are rebuffed by House Speaker John Boehner, I am struck by the ineffectiveness of the American system. So much energy, time, and productive effort are being wasted, in the USA, in argument between two sides who will never agree. Is that what democracy was meant to be about?

Democracy works when there is a clear mandate and one side can outvote the other. Only in such circumstances can there be effective leadership. However, in the USA, at present, there does not appear to be this dominance of one power over the other – as the result, we have a deadlock.

Given the stalemate in the USA on such an important issue as the debt ceiling and whether or not the USA defaults on its repayments, I am not convinced that the greatest powers, in the future, will necessarily be democratic ones. Democracy has certain strengths – but, at times like this, it is clear that unity of purpose is not one of them. The USA is showing us, that democracy can be a very weak form of leadership for a country, sad as it is, to say this – or at least, the form of democracy presently in place in the USA.

It does seem, watching the USA’s ongoing financial problems, social problems and political problems that we are in a modern equivalent, of the fall of Rome. It is altogether possible, indeed, seems altogether probable, that the USA will falter, irretrievably, in my own lifetime. If nothing else, it looks like the national debt will soon have the power to bring it down. It is a pity to note it, but the USA’s lauded version of democracy doesn’t seem to be helping much here. I say this, knowing that there are worse alternatives out there, too – however, quite a few of them would be more effective in the present situation.

I hope Obama and Boehner come to a deal soon. The world does not need another financial crisis. However, what it does seem to need, is a rethinking of how a government should work and what form constitutes the most effective and fair form of leadership. Looking at America, I am not convinced that their model is the best possible – there must, surely, be something, even theoretically possible, which can improve on the American mess? I will have to reflect on it.

A note to my readers: I will return to my customary themes of giftedness and the like, shortly but I felt that these recent events should be addressed. Thank you.

Posted by Valentine Cawley

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.htmland here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175

To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

Wikileaks' paradoxical secrecy potential.

Wikileaks. There, I have said it. I have actually mentioned the biggest news story of the decade. It had to be...I have watched on the sidelines too long.

I have been thinking about what Wikileaks are doing and, it seems to me, that they may achieve the exact opposite of what they intend. Wikileaks has the parodoxical potential to usher in an era of much greater secrecy in the USA.

The problem is this: the more Wikileaks exposes the USA, the more the USA will wish to protect itself from exposure. At this time, they are attacking Wikileaks, for releasing the information and persecuting them in whatever way they can. However, this does not address the true problem here: Wikileaks is not the origin of the information: the USA government is. Some state employee - perhaps PFC Bradley Manning - perhaps not, has given Wikileaks all of its information. Indeed, Wikileaks is only able to function because there are US citizens (and those of other countries around the world), disgruntled enough to reveal "state secrets" to an outside organization. Wikileaks is not the problem, here: US internal security of information is. Quite simply, as it is presently organized, the USA is congenitally unable to keep secrets, because it is entrusting them to the wrong people.

Once the USA has destroyed Wikileaks - which it is clear it intends to do, it will have to turn its attention to the real problem: the USA itself. The only way the USA will be able, logically, to protect itself from a Wikileaks style problem, is if it massively upgrades the security on information within the USA. This means, essentially, one thing: restricting the number of people who have access to that information and vetting those people more carefully. At present, I have read in various online newspapers somewhere in the region of two to three million US government employees, in various functions, had access to the information that has been leaked to Wikileaks. That strikes me as far too many to have any measure of security. So, it seems inevitable that the USA will begin to restrict access to "secret" information, in the wake of Wikileaks. However, this creates its own problem. You see, if state employees do not have access to the information they need to make decisions, then the state itself cannot function effectively. Thus, the USA is stuck between two needs: to maintain security of information - and to be able to function as a state. The only way to resolve this would be to increase the height of the hierarchy and to centralize decision making, more. This means deciding upon a limited number of layers who have, perhaps varying access, to information - and cutting off large numbers of people who presently have access. Now, those who have been placed in the dark need to refer to "higher ups" for advice on matters on which they would previously be able to proceed themselves.

Clearly, what I have described is a logical consequence of seeking to reduce the chances of further leaks. It is also a culture of much enhanced secrecy. It is the kind of culture that, on the outside, America is not supposed to represent. Yet, that is precisely the kind of culture which Wikileaks may force America to become: one paranoid about secrecy, extremely hierarchical and compartmentalized. It would also, incidentally, be inflexible, slow to respond and may, at times, be paralyzed, by the inability of a small number of people to make a large number of decisions. In some ways, such a change in structure, would weaken America, in ways that would do more damage to America than, perhaps, a constant stream of Wikileaks revelations. Either way, America loses...

However, if America chooses the path to greater secrecy as a way to protect against Wikileaks and similar endeavours then, in a fundamental way, Julian Assange and Wikileaks, will have failed. They would have provoked a shift towards secrecy, when, in fact, they had sought a shift towards open-ness. Wikileaks may, in fact, create a much darker world than the one it seeks to usher in. Wikileaks may lead to a world steeped in virtually unbreachable secrecy, a world in which almost no-one knows what is going on - because access to that information has been restricted as much as it is possible to do so, and still have a functional State.

Yet, if Wikileaks loses, in this way, we all lose. America would become an even less pleasant place to live in, than it already is - and the world would know even less about its conduct, than they do now.

Whatever happens, this much is sure: long after President Obama has been forgotten (and he shall be, on a long enough timescale), Julian Assange and Wikileaks will be remembered, for what they sought to achieve, even if they never achieve it. Another thing is sure, too: America cannot win in this situation - indeed, they have already lost. They cannot suppress the flow of revelations - and they will only be able to prevent future ones, by changing the entire character of their nation, in ways that would be detrimental to it. Thus, it is not untrue to say, that, in this information war, one man has defeated the world's supposedly greatest superpower. History will never forget that...though future American textbooks, might leave that information out, if their present behaviour is extrapolated. Never mind...other countries will remember for them.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 4, this month, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here: http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at: http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is at http://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)