On the road again...

Once again I am trying to head out on the road.

I expect to be gone for several weeks, that is if my truck cooperates this time.

I did a little research on internet access while I was on the road this past time out. Seems cell phone companies are offering unlimited access, regardless of time of day or day of the week for something like $60, of course there are probably any number of taxes and fees added to this price.

The salesman claimed the service offered by Sprint rivals broadband cable in its speed and that Cingular's service rivals DSL access. Why would anyone then choose Cingular? Because out West Sprint has large areas without coverage while Cingular's coverage is more robust.

Anyway, one of these days I might decide to jump onboard. It is probably going to have to wait for awhile though. First step for me is probably going to be to actually get a cell phone itself. Some drivers I run into are amazed I am still able to exist without that, let alone without internet access.

Nuclear Proliferation

Should opponents of the United States be given carte blanche to arm themselves with nuclear weapons to protect themselves from the United States nuclear weapons capability?

This is an interesting question. But if you explore the implications of the answers to this question, you need to explore the repercussions.

If all opponents of the United States MUST be allowed nuclear weapons, then why should all the allies of the United States be denied them?

As the situation now exists, if opponents can not resolve their differences without resorting to nuclear warfare, they can yield to combat without destroying the earth.

If every tin pot dictator has access to nuclear weapons to resolve his disputes, we are going to be in for a world of shit.

Those who already possess nuclear weapons have proven themselves to be mature enough not to resort to them to settle disputes. They have not been mature enough to resolve these disputes without warfare, but they have resisted the motivation to push the nuclear button.

If more and more nations become "nuclear capable" we are going to find nuclear weapons coming into the hands of those who are less mature. Those who will not blink that, when it comes to their use of these weapons, it could result in the destruction of mankind as a species.

As it stands now, those who insist on warfare can settle their differences through only the horrors of "conventional" warfare without destroying mankind while they are at it. The horrors they visit upon their corner of the earth might be unacceptable, however they do not wipe out all of mankind while they settle their differences.

Once every tin pot dictator possesses his own nuclear arsenal, this is not going to be the case. Google Idi Amin to see an example of what horrors such dictators might insist upon while they hold the whole world hostage.

Nuclear non-proliferation is one goal mankind must hold sacred if mankind as a species is to continue to exist.

Some might argue that mankind deserves to be wiped out. That mankind, as a species, really is that evil. I will point to the wonderful examples of where mankind exists as a fount of possibility. And I will ask this question. If mankind is wiped out, then what are the alternatives?

There is enough endangerment to our species with "any" being armed with nuclear weapons. Perhaps mankind can continue to exist while only a "few" are thus armed. We can not turn back the hands of time and disarm everyone. However we CAN try to limit this capability to only the "few" and continue to insist that not everyone deserves the right to destroy the world if he/she thinks it is necessary.

Conspiracy Behind 9-11

I am a 9-11 conspiracy skeptic.

However I try to honestly look at the evidence presented by the conspiracy theorists. I think we need to honestly examine the evidence presented because not always have our elected officials represented us in stalwart fashion.

In spite of all the "unreasonable" crap dished out by conspiracy theorists, which includes colored charts and graphs that actually would serve to obviously DISPROVE their case, occasionally one comes across an intelligent piece that actually causes one to consider the conspiracy might not be that outlandish.

(See here) Professor Steven E. Jones, from Brigham Young University, that puts forth the explanation we have been provided is not adequate.

This piece is rather scholarly. It overwhelms my own ignorance. However, even as ignorant as I am, I still will engage in criticism of his "scholarly" work. Notice how the learned professor discusses an experiment, and points to the results of his "laboratory conditions" experiment as proof in the regards to how aluminum will react with steel. Let me quote the caption provided to a picture of the experiment:

Molten aluminum poured onto rusted steel: no violent reactions observed at all.

Was this because all the various temperatures of steel as it came in contact with molten aluminum were explored? Nope. In his experiment molten aluminum came in contact with room temperature steel and that was all the proof he needed.

Ahem. Has anyone never heard of jumping to conclusions? And never heard of scientific experiments that "obviously must be true" resulting in preordained results?

Proof is that the "learned professor" only engaged in experiments until the results supported his conclusion. He did not continue to engage in experiments that explored all the possibilities. Once he got the results he needed, he stopped. He was already sure he was right, and once he obtained the results he wanted he was no longer motivated to explore alternate theories.

Now these observations come from an uneducated truck driver. But that these observations can so easily be made by such an uneducated truck driver proves just how flimsy the evidence the "learned professor" presents really is.

If you are going to put your money on "learned professors" against the odds of "common sense" I will point you in the direction towards learning of your own folly. Let us examine John Edward Mack, noted Harvard professor and even recipient of the Pulitzer Prize. He seemed to think we should accept that some human beings really are abducted by little green aliens.

The opinions of the learned should be respected, however they need not automatically be accepted as fact. While Albert Einstein serves as an example of how "brilliant eggheads" can serve as the fountain of truth, for every Albert Einstein we have to put up with thousands of lunatics. Not every egghead who tries to be Albert Einstein accomplishes his goal. Some of them are just idiots, in fact most of them are.

We should try and keep the door open for the next Albert Einstein. Problem is all the lunatics that keep rushing the door that motivates us to lock it!

Babies Can "Learn" In The Womb

(See here) a BBC article that reports on a study that seems to show fetuses can learn in the womb.

Dr Cathelijne van Heteren from University Hospital Maastricht said the study showed foetuses had both short and long-term memories.

"We therefore conclude that foetuses have a short term memory of at least 10 minutes and a long-term memory of at least 24 hours."

It is important to note this study was conducted on late term, unborn babies, between 37 and 40 weeks old. While it does nothing to indicate at which point the fetus has a functioning brain, it does indicate that it is not only after the baby takes the "magical mystery tour" down the birth canal that the baby becomes a person.

Israeli Palestinian Summit

(See here) a Jerusalem Post article that reports Israeli PM Olmert and Palestinian President Abbas have met and agreed to hold an official summit. While it is important to note the purpose of the summit will not be negotiations towards the end of the conflict, that any meeting at all is going to take place is surely a positive step.

Perhaps negotiations could commence if the Palestinian People approve President Abbas's referendum proposal slated to be voted on come July 26th.

(See here) another Jerusalem Post article, this one reports about comments made by PM Olmert at the Petra Nobel Laureates conference while he was in Jordan.

What was very striking to me were these comments:

"I will pull out from territories, not from every inch, I have no commitment to the boundaries [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas] Abu Mazen is demanding [a withdrawal to the 1967 lines]. This we will negotiate and I will make compromises. There will be blocs of settlements that cannot be evacuated. And there will be many, many settlements vacated by Israel which would give the Palestinians territorial contiguity in which they can realize their dream of a Palestinian state," Olmert said.

Had Barak taken such a position during negotiations at Taba, he might have even gotten Yasser Arafat to agree to a peace agreement.

Of course the article does not mention whether or not PM Olmert also addressed one of the other sticky issues, and that being what his intentions are when the subject of Jerusalem comes up. Certainly he must understand that some method of sharing Jerusalem with the Palestinians must be found.

An interesting "demand" from the Israeli side, before negotiations even start, is disclosed by this statement PM Olmert made:

Settlers, Olmert added, would have to make a "personal choice" whether they wanted to live in a Jewish state or a Palestinian state. "The settlers can decide they would rather live on this particular piece of land, and that is [their] choice," Olmert said.

Nobel Laureate Robert Aumann, a staunch settlement supporter, stated:

"I will live in a Palestinian state if my life is assured by the Palestinian Authority, and I call on others to do the same if their security is assured. If it cannot be assured, then there is no peace. If we have hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, Arabs living in Israel, and we cannot have Israelis living in the land of the [Palestinian] Authority, then there is no peace,"

This "demand" is not as ludicrous as some might think. Think about it. Should Jewish citizens be allowed to live within Palestine and actually retain ownership of property if they can prove this property was obtained legally and they agree to abide by Palestinian laws? I think this is a reasonable demand.

However if this demand must be entertained, then the reverse side of the coin must be considered. Will a Palestinian citizen, if he can prove ownership of property, be allowed to reside within Israel? What then about all the Palestinian refugees who fled back in 1948 and who's families still hold deeds to property within Israel? Will this land be returned to them even though perhaps they will not be given citizenship within Israel?

If the settlers are going to "demand" the Palestinians must be "reasonable" (and I think the demand is reasonable) are the Israelis just as willing to be "reasonable"? Or does "reason" flow only in one direction?

Sometimes Complaining Works

Sometimes it works to be a complaining customer.

First let me give you some background. It has been a regular practice for truckstops to give truck drivers free coffee when they purchase at least a minimum level of fuel, most times around 50 gallons. This free coffee extended all the way up to filling the half gallon thermos I cart around.

About a year ago or so some truckstop chains tried to change this tradition and add coffee as a profit center to their operations. One chain, Pilot, has introduced "upscale" coffee selections to what they offer, I guess in an attempt to compete with Starbucks or something. Along with this change they also started offering "Driver Payback Points" at 1 cent per gallon of diesel. I will observe that this change was probably greatly appreciated by truck drivers who do not drink coffee since these points could be used to purchase anything in the store.

A few months back Pilot also raised their price for thermos refills from $1.39 to $1.49 (before taxes) which further irked me. You see, I probably average about 100 gallons when I fill my tanks. Sometimes more, sometimes less, but the average is probably somewhere close to 100 gallons. This means that the driver payback points did not cover my thermos refill even when the price was $1.39 let alone after the increase. I wanted my free coffee back!

When I was headed for home last month, on May 23rd, I stopped in at the Pilot in Greenville, VA. While completing my transaction, including paying for my thermos of coffee, I started giving hell to the poor gal who was manning the register about how I wanted free coffee back. The gal tried to give me the corporate line and tried to explain the advantages of the change, but to her I must have seemed unreasonable. I was having none of that and continued to insist that I wanted free coffee. Finally the poor lady had enough of my shit and told me that the corporate regional manager was on the premises and he was the one I really needed to take this up with. I said great, just point him out to me while thinking "Great, somebody with some clout. I'd prefer speaking with the "national" manager, but if the regional guy is all that is available, that will have to do."

The gal introduced me to the regional manager and I immediately launched into him with my concerns. He tried to explain the reasoning behind the changes. I told him, that as a customer, I was not happy with the changes, that his competitors, such as Petro, Loves and Flying J still gave free coffee to truck drivers. The manager explained that while the competitor's coffee might be free, it was "bottom of the barrel" when it came to coffee. I replied "Bullshit. There is nothing wrong with their coffee. I do not want Starbucks coffee. I want a good, fresh jug of traditional American coffee and I want it as cheap as possible. You can't get cheaper then free."

The manager thanked me for voicing my concerns, and I thanked him for hearing me out. I then went back to my truck and broadcast on the CB. "Here's your chance fellahs. The regional manager for Pilot is on the premises. I gave him an earful of how I wanted free coffee back. You might want to take the opportunity to voice your complaints as well."

After a few days at home, I headed back out on the road at the beginning of June. My first fuel stop was again at a Pilot. Prominently displayed, where truck drivers could not help but notice, was a sign announcing the cost of refills of thermoses had been decreased to 99 cents. Part of the sign was the statement "Good coffee is not good enough."

Could my complaint have yielded results so quickly? Nah, I thought, I had only been home for about 8 days. The sign announcing the change was one of those slick, professionally printed signs. Certainly they could not have decided on the change, gotten the sign designed, printed and posted that quickly.

But one nagging thought I have is that I doubt the regional manager would not have dropped a hint to me to watch for changes if the changes were already in the works. While he might have been sworn to secrecy or something, I doubt he could have resisted the temptation to inform me that changes I would be pleased with were coming.

For those of you who are traveling this summer, and who need a jolt of caffeine to help you keep your eyes open while you travel, let me key you in where to get a good, fresh, cup of coffee. Pull into any truckstop where the diesel fuel islands are bustling or who's parking lot is full of trucks. Truck drivers drain the coffee pots so quickly, no matter the time of day, that the coffee you draw will then be sure to be fresh and not have been sitting there baking for hours at a time. These truckstops also rarely leave the pots empty so that you have to wait for it to be brewed. They know the sooner they can get the truck driver back into his truck and pulling out of the fuel island, the sooner the next truck can start filling up his tanks, and that is where they make their real money.

Every Pilot offers a selection of various coffees. Choices include the House Blend (my favorite), Pure Columbian (which I find pleasing but still avoid because I do not want to get spoiled. It is not available everywhere), Arabica Dark Roast (which I find unpleasant, I think it is the dark roast, because Arabica standard roast is pretty good) and Kenya King (which I have not even gathered the courage to try).

If a fresh cup of "traditional" coffee is all you desire, you can't go wrong with stopping at a T/A, Loves, Flying J or Petro. One warning about the Petro's though, if you want to ensure it is fresh you will probably have to take a walk to the diesel fuel island building which will be apart from the main building. Also do not be intimidated by the "industrial size" vat you will come to at the Flying J. I guarantee you it will be good and fresh. As for Loves, their coffee is 100% Arabica beans, but with a standard roast. Some of the T/A (Travelcenters of America) are starting to offer a selection of various coffees, however I am uncertain whether or how it will take for this to spread to all T/A's. Independent truckstops vary with quality and price. Some offer a great coffee for free still, even without purchase, but some of them want an arm and a leg to fill your jug. But if you do not know ahead of time it will be like playing roulette.

For those of you who are addicted to Starbucks, go ahead and feed your addiction. I know I avoid the Beckley, West Virginia service plaza on the West Virginia Turnpike (unless my thermos is already filled) because when Starbucks moved in the reasonably priced coffee moved out. You used to be able to get a thermos full of Maxwell House there from Burger King for a reasonable price until they opened the Starbucks. I walked up to the Starbucks and they wanted something like 8 bucks to fill my thermos. I told them they could keep it because it couldn't be that good!

Guantanamo Bay

Due to the recent suicides committed by three detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, the "horrible conditions" at the detention facility are again the rage of discussion.

I wish to try and set the record straight. First I wish to point to an audio link. (See here) a National Public Radio piece where two "experts" from opposite sides of the spectrum were to discuss the conditions at Gitmo. Notice how the discussion quickly turns from the overall conditions at Gitmo to interrogation techniques. Why is this? Is it because it is in THAT area improvements to treatment of prisoners is still required but no valid complaints about overall conditions can be fielded? This piece also includes an interesting discussion about just how long the detainees can be held.

(See here) an ABC News piece that reports: "Detainees are enjoying better treatment at the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, and the Red Cross is satisfied with its access to them, the humanitarian agency's chief said on Tuesday."

(See here) an Armed Forces Information Service piece that reports: "Gone are the days of concrete slabs and open-air chain-link enclosures in Camp X-Ray. Hood explained that Camp X-Ray was a hastily built structure to deal with a rapidly changing situation in the war on terrorism and that the facilities there were never meant to be used for long-term detention."

(See here) a WAVY piece that reports: "Even as much of the international community presses for the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, an Afghan delegation found conditions there "humane.""

I sure wish that anyone who wants to discuss the conditions at Gitmo at least tried to stay abreast of current conditions before they attempt to discuss them. Yes, conditions at first might have been a little miserable but they have changed and improved. Yes, valid criticism (at least in my opinion) can still be levelled about interrogation techniques, but apparently not about overall conditions themselves.

Dixie Chicks

The Dixie Chicks have put out a new CD. Word is that it is a best seller.

One problem. Country Western stations are not playing the songs. Why not? It is a best selling CD, it is "popular" but they will not play it.

Oh that is right. In the run up to the Iraq war the Dixie Chicks dared to publicly speak out against Dubyah Bush. They can not be forgiven for, as entertainers, daring to voice a viewpoint.

Well if Country Western stations enjoy the freedom to boycott the Dixie Chicks, then I too can exercise my freedom and boycott Country Western stations. It is not like Country Western stations avoid politics. With great regularity they will play Toby Keith singing about the Statue of Liberty shaking her fist and how putting a boot up your ass is the American way! It is not for politics that they spurn the Dixie Chicks, they love broadcasting "proper" political songs.

I guess if I want to hear the Dixie Chicks I am going to have to rush out and buy the CD for myself.

But until American Country Western stations start respecting the All American right to freedom of speech, and yes this includes the Dixie Chick's rights, I am going to exercise my right to tune right past them as I scan the dial.

The Dixie Chicks possess beautiful voices. They write their own songs, which further endears me towards them.

For those who condemn the Dixie Chicks for being "left wing extremists" or something, let me remind you that one of their hits, before they were yanked from the airwaves, was "Travelin' Soldier".

I want to hear the Dixie Chicks. The American Public wants to hear the Dixie Chicks. They have released a new CD which is a hit but still they can not get any airtime. Until Country Western stations start playing what I want to hear, I am not going to tune them in.

I announce a one man boycott of Country Western stations until they "change their evil ways". Grin.

An Answered Prayer?

This is going to be windy, since alot goes into this story, so please bear with me. Let me share one occurrence that happened to me during my most recent trip out on the road.

I had delivered a load of freight into Southern California, east of Los Angeles. My next load involved a couple pickups south of LA headed for Western Pennsylvania. Via satellite, along with all the information such as address of shippers, I received what is called a "fuel solution". This is a computer program's recommendation, after it decides my probable route, on where I should find the cheapest fuel enroute.

This computer program leaves alot to be desired, but from experience I have come to treat its recommendations as being partially valid. If I had access to all the information it does, I could beat it with a little common sense thrown in, but I do not have access to all the data it bases its recommendations on. You see, one benefit of being associated with the company I am contracted with is that I enjoy discounts on the posted price. I almost always get a discount off the price they sell to the general public, problem is I never know ahead of time how deep the discount will be. I only find out days later when I am charged for the fuel. This discount averages somewhere around 8 to 10 cents a gallon, but has run as deep as 38 cents per gallon from my personal experience. The computer knows the discount, I do not, so I rely on the computer.

However the computer is not perfect. It seems to rely on the "average" fuel mileage for big trucks. I enjoy routine fuel economy that beats this "average" by about 20%. The load I was picking up was also extremely light weighing in at just 15,000 lbs, so my normally only "great" fuel mileage was probably going to be "fantastic".

Anyway, the computer recommended I fuel up with 50 gallons of diesel in Hesperia, CA which should be enough fuel to get my to Kingman Arizona where the fuel would be cheaper. I thought this much fuel was excessive, but I planned on putting at least 20, perhaps 30, gallons on in Hesperia. When I pulled into the truck stop in Hesperia, the fuel islands where jammed up and backed up. Due to this reason, and a few others, I decided to fuel in the morning and found myself a parking spot to camp out for the night.

I did not set my alarm clock. Whenever possible, I sleep until I naturally wake up as from experience I find this helps keep me from getting groggy during the long stretches of boring road I deal with every day. Problem is I slept long past the time I thought I would. I had figured on waking up at around 07:00 or 08:00 East Coast time (04:00 or 05:00 Pacific) and I woke up at 10:30 AM. Perhaps I had particularly tired from fighting the Southern California traffic the entire previous day, but whatever was the reason I was already behind my schedule. I quickly got down to business, did up my logbook and put my truck into gear.

As I straightened my rig out on the entrance ramp to the freeway, I remembered I forgot to fuel before I left! My mind started racing. Turn back? What the heck, I could go against the computer and fuel in Barstow. Probably wouldn't be but about a penny difference in the price. But what about going for broke? Did I have enough fuel to make it to Kingman without additional fuel?

I need to go into my history briefly here. When I first started trucking, and bought my own truck, I was extremely price conscious of fuel prices. I didn't enjoy a computer making recommendations to me and I did not enjoy the advantage of discounts off the posted price. I tried to stretch my 200 gallons of fuel to the maximum to get from one cheap fuel location to the next. Once, I stretched the margin so far that my truck started spitting and sputtering as I hit the exit ramp to get fuel. My engine quit, starved for fuel, as I approached the fuel island. Lucky for me there was an empty fuel island and I was able to coast to a stop ready to put on fuel. I was giving myself ulcers in order to save a few dollars.

Back to Hesperia, CA. I decided to go for it. What the heck, I was pretty certain I could make it to the Arizona state line where I could always take on fuel in Lake Havasau if need be. Certainly Lake Havasau would be cheaper then Barstow. But I was going to keep a steady eye on the fuel gauge and try to make Kingman!

As I headed out across the Mojave Desert I noted, from the brush along side the road, that the winds were still. Last thing I needed was a headwind to cut into my fuel mileage. However the day was still early and the sun was not yet high enough to stir things up. From the weather eggheads I had learned that the sun was responsible for the winds. As the sun rises, it heats up the air at the surface. The amount of heat is influenced by the amount of cloud cover. With no cloud cover the surface temperature of the air is warmed and this warmed air rises creating a low pressure area on the surface. Where areas of cloud cover exist, high altitude air cools and tends to sink to the surface, creating surface high pressure areas. On the surface, air tries to rush from these high pressure areas to the low pressure areas resulting in the winds we experience. I was not experiencing any winds, but the day was still young.

As the day wore on and I approached Needles I got into a discussion with some other truckers on the CB about fuel mileage. The conversation on fuel mileage got started on a long downhill stretch of highway west of Needles. We noted how the California state troopers liked to sit at the bottom of the hill and catch truckers who were letting gravity increase our fuel mileage. I had just completed noting in the conversation how headwinds tore my fuel mileage up, and how I seemed to get more then my fair share of headwinds, when I again checked the brush along side the road for evidence of winds. From the brush, I noted that once again I seemed to have a headwind. Damn the luck!

Let me clue you in to my discussions on the CB with my fellow truckers. I had discussed how it always seemed to me that if a wind is blowing, for me it is a headwind. With routine chance, I should experience a tail wind as often as a head wind. From my perception, I almost always seem to get the headwind. I even recounted to my fellow truckers how once I fought a headwind all across Nebraska and Wyoming and delivered in Salt Lake City. Picking up a load in Salt Lake City headed east, I expected to enjoy a tailwind. But the winds had shifted. I fought a headwind all the way back. Truth is I probably do get the tailwind as often as I get the headwind, but I enjoy complaining about my "bad luck"!

As I passed the California Agricultural Inspection Station (located on the westbound side) near Needles I noted they had a standard size American flag fluttering from a flagpole. While it is hard to interpret wind direction from brush, there was no doubting the flag. It was fluttering directly at me indicating that once again I had a stiff headwind. On the CB I broadcast, "Yup, once again I have my headwind, my apologies to you guys that are headed east with me."

Silently I said a prayer to God. It went something like "Lord, I really do not need a headwind right now. I'm trying to make it to Kingman. It sure would help me if the winds died down, or if I only faced a crosswind (which also hurts fuel mileage, just not as much) . I know this would probably be too much to ask, but a tailwind would be great."

A few miles later, I approached the Arizona Port of Entry. I was given the bypass while still on the highway (I didn't have to enter the scales). As I passed I noted they too flew an American flag. This time the flag indicated a crosswind from my right. To myself I chuckled and prayed again. "Lord, I do not want to seem ungrateful. This crosswind is nice, but if I am going to make it to Kingman without stressing out, a tailwind sure would help."

A few miles later I came to the Lake Havasau fuel stop and I noted my fuel gauge. It was going to be tight, but I judged, absent the headwind, I could make it to Kingman. I pushed on.

Not too long later, from the brush alongside the road, I noted the winds had shifted. I seemed to have a tailwind. Cresting a hill I spied a business flying a standard size American flag. The flag was fluttering directly away from me. I had a tailwind. Shortly after I came across a wind sock that the highway department puts up to warn travelers about crosswinds. I was amazed that it too seemed to indicate I had a tailwind that blew from directly behind me.

Could this be "Providence"? Perhaps God took pity on me and did not want to see me run out of fuel alongside the road? I am not real familiar with this stretch of interstate, I certainly do not know it like the back of my hand (like other areas), but I have traveled it several times. Seeking a "rational" explanation I questioned "Providence". After all, just because a farmer prays for rain and it rains does not mean his prayers were answered, it might have rained anyway, right?

I remembered that the Interstate 40 heads north shortly after the Arizona line towards Kingman. I glanced at my highway almanac. Sure enough, "eastbound" Interstate 40 dips south right at Needles. So if a south wind was blowing I would have a headwind. As the freeway approaches the Arizona line it turns east. As I passed the Arizona Port of Entry, if a southerly wind was blowing I would have had a crosswind. 10 or 15 miles later, the highway turns to the north towards Kingman, so if a southerly wind was blowing I would have had a tailwind.

Eureka! A rational explanation.

Only one problem. About the time I came upon my Eureka moment I again scanned the brush alongside the road. Once again the brush seemed to indicate I was headed into a headwind and I had not changed direction. It was as if God was saying to me "You ungrateful little shit. You ask me for a favor, I grant it, and instead of being grateful and saying Thank You, you try to rationalize it away. Explain this one then." Being stubborn, I doubted my eyes. After all, wind direction from brush can be deceiving.

Several miles later, as I crested a hill, I spied another American flag fluttering. This time it was one of the immense ones that some business flew from a large flagpole. It was fluttering directly at me. Silently I thought "OK God, I get the point. I am sorry." As I approached, and then passed this large fluttering flag, I watched as the flag slowly rotated to where I had a crosswind, and yes, even once again my tailwind. As if God was saying "I forgive you. Here is your tailwind back, as long as you know where it came from."

I made it to Kingman with fuel to spare. After I fueled and continued on I noted that the winds for the rest of the evening seemed to come from the south. But I was pleased to notice that the next day, after the sun had risen high enough and the winds started up again, I enjoyed a tailwind as if God was providing me with an exclamation point to the previous day's lesson.

I do not credit/blame God for everything. For example, I have spent nearly $2,000 already this year trying to get my truck's A/C working and once again I had to return home early to get it worked on. But from my experience, God can make his presence known in ways that any reasonable/rational human being can not deny.

God might control the winds, but I still have to depend on a mechanic to get my A/C working. Grin.

Hamas Hypocrisy

I am going to discuss the killing of Palestinian civilians on the beach in Gaza. Instead of pointing the finger of blame at Israel, and there is some question as to whether Israel was even involved, I am going to point the finger of blame at Hamas.

I put forth this argument. Even if the beach deaths were the result of an Israeli artillery shell, Hamas is at least as much, if not more, to blame as Israel.

How can this be so? Israel has been enduring routine Qassam rocket attacks from Gaza. While a cease fire was agreed to by Hamas, Islamic Jihad has not been observing this cease fire. Some people point at the elections where Hamas won a stunning victory. Why will not this "majority government" then police the cease fire? Why didn't this "majority" force the "minority" unelected Islamic Jihad to comply with the cease fire? Oh that's right. Hamas claims they do not want to start a civil war!

Excuse me. Hamas seems to be all too willing to engage in a civil war with Fatah, but when it comes to Islamic Jihad they suddenly become meek and seek national unity. When it comes to Fatah they will resort to Rocket Propelled Grenades but when it comes to Islamic Jihad they suddenly become timid.

Israel retains the right to retaliate against Qassam rockets launched during the so called cease fire. If Hamas refuses to police their own country then Israel must resort to desperate measures. Hamas has proven they are capable of action by the "civil war" they are conducting with Fatah. That they refuse to use the same measures against Islamic Jihad proves (to me anyway) that while they might condemn the attacks publicly, behind the scenes they gave Islamic Jihad the wink and a nod.

Action (or lack of it) speaks louder then words. Hamas' actions scream hypocrisy.

If the elected government of Palestine refuses to police their own cease fire, then Israel must defend itself. I argue Israel retains the right to resort to retaliation in response to the Qassam rocket barrages. These rockets are being launched against Israeli civilian population centers. Israel has responded with artillery barrages. If Hamas wants the artillery barrages to stop, they must stop the Qassam barrages.

On the road again...

I'm trying to return to the road again this morning. I expect to be gone for several weeks. One of these days I am going to obtain access to the internet while I am on the road.

I have been hearing of a number of truckdrivers that are starting to obtain access via the cellular companies. They are not doing this through "WiFi hotspots" (which is too expensive and spotty) but via the cell towers. I wouldn't mind hearing informed comments as to access speeds (compared to say dial up or WiFi) that could be expected and costs associated with access. Is there a such thing as free nights and weekends with any of the plans?