Ultimately, the reason why love and compassion bring the greatest happiness is simply that our nature cherishes them above all else. The need for love lies at the very foundation of human existence. It results from the profound interdependence we all share with one another. However capable and skillful an individual may be, left alone, he or she will not survive. However vigorous and independent one may feel during the most prosperous periods of life, when one is sick or very young or very old, one must depend on the support of others.

~Dalai Lama

By His Holiness Dalai Lama

Of course, war and the large military establishments are the greatest sources of violence in the world. Whether their purpose is defensive or offensive, these vast powerful organizations exist solely to kill human beings. We should think carefully about the reality of war. Most of us have been conditioned to regard military combat as exciting and glamorous – an opportunity for men to prove their competence and courage. Since armies are legal, we feel that war is acceptable; in general, nobody feels that war is criminal or that accepting it is criminal attitude. In fact, we have been brainwashed. War is neither glamorous nor attractive. It is monstrous. Its very nature is one of tragedy and suffering.

War is like a fire in the human community, one whose fuel is living beings. I find this analogy especially appropriate and useful. Modern warfare waged primarily with different forms of fire, but we are so conditioned to see it as thrilling that we talk about this or that marvelous weapon as a remarkable piece of technology without remembering that, if it is actually used, it will burn living people. War also strongly resembles a fire in the way it spreads. If one area gets weak, the commanding officer sends in reinforcements. This is throwing live people onto a fire. But because we have been brainwashed to think this way, we do not consider the suffering of individual soldiers. No soldiers want to be wounded or die. None of his loved ones wants any harm to come to him. If one soldier is killed, or maimed for life, at least another five or ten people – his relatives and friends – suffer as well. We should all be horrified by the extent of this tragedy, but we are too confused.

Frankly as a child, I too was attracted to the military. Their uniform looked so smart and beautiful. But that is exactly how the seduction begins.  Children starts playing games that will one day lead them in trouble. There are plenty of exciting games to play and costumes to wear other than those based on the killing of human beings. Again, if we as adults were not so fascinated by war, we would clearly see that to allow our children to become habituated to war games is extremely unfortunate. Some former soldiers have told me that when they shot their first person they felt uncomfortable but as they continued to kill it began to feel quite normal. In time, we can get used to anything.

It is not only during times of war that military establishments are destructive. By their very design, they were the single greatest violators of human rights, and it is the soldiers themselves who suffer most consistently from their abuse. After the officer in charge have given beautiful explanations about the importance of the army, its discipline and the need to conquer the enemy, the rights of the great mass of soldiers are most entirely taken away. They are then compelled to forfeit their individual will, and, in the end, to sacrifice their lives. Moreover, once an army has become a powerful force, there is every risk that it will destroy the happiness of its own country.

There are people with destructive intentions in every society, and the temptation to gain command over an organisation capable of fulfilling their desires can become overwhelming. But no matter how malevolent or evil are the many murderous dictators who can currently oppress their nations and cause international problems, it is obvious that they cannot harm others or destroy countless human lives if they don’t have a military organisation accepted and condoned by society. As long as there are powerful armies there will always be danger of dictatorship. If we really believe dictatorship to be a despicable and destructive form of government, then we must recognize that the existence of a powerful military establishment is one of its main causes.

Militarism is also very expensive. Pursuing peace through military strength places a tremendously wasteful burden on society. Governments spend vast sums on increasingly intricate weapons when, in fact, nobody really wants to use them. Not only money but also valuable energy and human intelligence are squandered, while all that increases is fear.

I want to make it clear, however, that although I am deeply opposed to war, I am not advocating appeasement. It is often necessary to take a strong stand to counter unjust aggression. For instance, it is plain to all of us that the Second World War was entirely justified. It “saved civilization” from the tyranny of Nazi Germany, as Winston Churchill so aptly put it. In my view, the Korean War was also just, since it gave South Korea the chance of gradually developing democracy. But we can only judge whether or not a conflict was vindicated on moral grounds with hindsight. For example, we can now see that during the Cold War, the principle of nuclear deterrence had a certain value. Nevertheless, it is very difficult to assess al such matters with any degree of accuracy. War is violence and violence is unpredictable. Therefore, it is better to avoid it if possible, and never to presume that we know beforehand whether the outcome of a particular war will be beneficial or not.

For instance, in the case of the Cold War, through deterrence may have helped promote stability, it did not create genuine peace. The last forty years in Europe have seen merely the absence of war, which has not been real peace but a facsimile founded dear. At best, building arms to maintain peace serves only as a temporary measure. As long as adversaries do not trust each other, any number of factors can upset the balance of power. Lasting peace can assure secured only on the basis of genuine trust.

Link to this article

Distance means so little when someone means so much…
Distance never separates two hearts that really care, for the memories span
the miles and in seconds they are there. But whenever you start feeling sad,
because you miss them, remind yourself how lucky you are to have someone
so special to miss. ~Unknown

2015 BMW M3 and M4 press drive at Road America.

By Alex Lloyd, Motoramic
June 17, 2014

While BMW may say that its halo car is the all-new i8 hybrid, in reality, it’s the M3. The “i” line certainly predicts the future, but the M3 will always be a key to that future’s existence; just say “E30” to anyone who has the vaguest interest in performance cars and they’ll tell you that it embodies everything BMW’s M division stands for.

2015 BMW M3

However, in the same breath they’ll complain about how it’s been going wrong ever since, and that the E46 was the last pureblooded M3. That timing loosely correlates with BMW’s expansion into SUVs with the X5, and a few short years later into big hatchbacks like the X6 and now plug-in hybrids. Model numbers have swelled too; today a 3 Series coupe is a 4 Series (although you can still buy a four-door 4 Series like the 3 Series if you opt for the Gran Coupe model — not to be confused with the four-door 3 Series Gran Turismo).

Dilution, then, is the term of the decade. And yet from a sales perspective, bombarding buyers with confusing choices clearly works; BMW just recorded its best May in history. But for the enthusiast, these sales come at a price – one that’s not counted in dollar bills but in the number of hairs standing on the back of your neck.

Take the latest M5, for example. By all measured statistics, it performs brilliantly. But as an object of desire, it lacks emotion. There’s nothing special about it, and the same conclusion fills Internet forums regarding the outgoing E90 M3. And with the 2015 M3/M4 ditching its V-8 motor in favor of a twin-turbo inline-6, worries about the M3’s status of corporate spirit animal have been fueled even further.

The carbon brace is a beautiful example of engineering

Of course some of that negativity was merely chatter from commenters (and some journalists) who have never driven cars like an E30, E36 or E46 M3 for comparison. A new M3 is worse than an older one because that’s the stereotypical storyline we all adhere to, whether we have a basis to make those judgments or not. And it will be the same thing as the reviews for the fifth-gen, F80 M3 pile in: “Brilliant, yes – but it’s no E30.”

I’ve not driven enough pre-E90s to make a thorough comparison, so I won’t try to make one here in our first drive of the 2015 M3 and M4. And it’s primarily irrelevant anyway, as the topography of the auto industry has shifted so vastly over the years that cars like the E30 couldn’t exist today. Regardless, I find the current F10 M5 to be disappointing not because of the E60 M5’s greatness, but because as a standalone car it failed to grip me: it’s fast, comfortable and handles great, but it keeps the driver at arms length.

BMW’s dilution issue is something real, and as we’ve discovered with the M5, it has impacted some key models. For 2015, the F80 M3/M4 promises to maintain the spark that was passed down from the past four generations, while increasing its usability. During the car’s presentation at Road America – one of the most revered racetracks in America – there was plenty of PR chatter about M standing for efficiency and sustainability (the new cars boast 25 percent better fuel economy), as well as the ultimate in performance. I bet that wasn’t the case at the original’s launch in 1985, but it’s a reminder of how times have changed.

All-new twin turbo inline-6 replaces the V-8 from the old M3

On track, though, it’s business as usual. The M3/M4 duo weigh around 180 lbs. less than their outgoing counterpart. They’re more powerful, too, with 425 hp and 406 lb.-ft. of torque arriving from an all-new 3.0-liter engine with a closed-deck crankcase. The two mono-scroll turbochargers spin up to 120k-200k rpm, with an electric wastegate and 18 psi of maximum boost pressure. To combat the lack of throttle response associated with a turbo motor, BMW opted for a lighter forged crankshaft to reduce the rotating mass, while ensuring the continuously variable valve and camshaft timing work in harmony.

While I was impressed by Ferrari’s new turbocharged engine in the California T, in the M3/M4, it’s even better. The throttle response is explosive in all gears. Despite its high-revving redline of 7,600 rpm, by 7,000 rpm it feels like it’s running out of steam. In the Ferrari, it felt like it was still motoring at its 7,500 rpm redline, but the Bimmer’s initial punch feels more engaging.

The noise in the cabin comes from BMW’s engine synthesizer, and just knowing that makes it harder to fall in love with the car. But you get used to it, and the rumble emitted engages. It just doesn’t sound all that hot from outside the car, but if you’re in the driver’s seat, I suppose that doesn’t matter.

Carbon ceramic brakes arrive as an option

Hydraulic power steering is now replaced by electric steering, and BMW has made the transition seamlessly. You have a good sense of what the front wheels are doing, although the steering is quite heavy even in Comfort mode. And I like that, as I rarely drive in anything less than Sport mode, but in the M3/M4, Comfort is all you need on the streets. On the track, however, Sport Plus was the mode of choice, mainly because I liked the additional weight on center for Road America’s curved back straight where we were surpassing 150 mph.

Carbon brakes were fitted to all our track cars, and they’re excellent. The pedal feel is just right and the ABS won’t kick in unnecessarily. You crest 150 mph three times at Road America, with all three straights leading to heavy downhill braking zones. Confidence, therefore, is imperative, and I never once felt unsure as to how late I could brake. They also respond well to plenty of pedal pressure, but if you don’t plan on tracking your M3/M4, then the steel stoppers work just fine.

The handling of both cars is phenomenal, with the slight edge going to the two-door M4. When you talk about a vehicle with no understeer and no oversteer, you’re talking about a car with the perfect neutral balance. It doesn’t exist. Only BMW has somehow discovered it – at least here at Road America. There’s so much grip from the Michelin Pilot Super Sports, and you can sense that the front of the car is much stiffer than in the E90. The reduction in weight helps the car to respond instantly to any throttle or steering actions. On turn in, the clever electric diff opens to ensure the front wheels dive down to the apex, while on power down, it adjusts so as traction is no issue. It’s not intimidating to drive fast, and unlike the M5, it’s not just great at what it does, but it engages. It feels special. And it’s a whopping 15 seconds faster than the outgoing M3 on the Nurburgring. (But you better switch the ESC off, as even in it’s most aggressive setting, it’s ridiculously intrusive.)

2015 BMW M4

That feeling of specialness transitions with you to the public roads, although today’s “usability” standards make that engagement tougher to discern. I found myself flipping between Comfort and Sport mode on the all-new aluminum shocks, with Sport Plus mode reserved purely for the racetrack. Despite a 0-60 mph time of around 3.9 seconds, its 425 hp feels exploitable on the public tarmac. And the dual-clutch transmission is so good that you don’t wish for the manual; although after driving on the streets with one, rowing my own gears was still preferable, primarily because the gear changes are precise and the shift knob looks and feels like the M3s of old – it was nostalgic, and despite not wanting to get into that tiresome old versus new debate, I did enjoy the sensation.

Both the M3 and M4’s interiors are nice if not spectacular, and a great new feature means you can control your GoPro via the car’s iDrive infotainment screen. At $62,925 for the M3 and $65,125 for the M4, the question as to which one you should buy comes down to personal preference: do you like the two-door silhouette better than the four? For me, I do, but I’d need the four-door’s practicality.

BMW M3 and M4

But the question will remain: Is this the best M3 yet? Can it dance with an E30, for example? That’s not for me to judge, and, as I’ve said, the results would mostly be meaningless. So let’s just leave it at this: If you’ve had concerns about BMW’s M division losing its way of late, the new M3/M4 will prove that when it gets it right, it’s as alive as it’s ever been. Now. If only we could say the same about the current M5.

Disclosure: For this article, the writer’s transportation, meals and lodging costs were paid for by one or more subjects of the article. Yahoo does not promise to publish any stories or provide coverage to any individual or entity that paid for some or all of the costs of any of our writers to attend an event.

Link to this story

Wildness reminds us what it means to be human, what we are
connected to rather than what we are separate from.

— Terry Tempest Williams

Love is understanding each other,making one to smile, being open and caring.
Love can make you do amazing things that you did not think were possible.

By Peter Henderson and Paul Lienert
Reuters, June 16, 2014

SAN FRANCISCO/DETROIT (Reuters) – General Motors Co recalled three million more cars for ignition switch issues on Monday, roughly doubling the number of GM vehicles with known switch problems in a crisis that has defined the automaker and new Chief Executive Mary Barra this year.

GM on Monday recalled 3.36 million midsize and fullsize cars globally with ignition switches that can be jarred out of the “run” position, potentially affecting power steering, power brakes and air bags.

The switch issue is similar to the defect linked to at least 13 deaths in an earlier, 2.6-million vehicle recall of Chevrolet Cobalts and other small cars.

GM engineers first noted the Cobalt problem more than a decade ago, and GM’s slow response to the switch issue triggered investigations within the company and by Congress and federal agencies.

“The recall is just sort of the tip of the iceberg in terms of what has to be done” at GM, Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut and one of GM’s more vocal critics in Congress, said after Monday’s recall.

GM said the engineer who designed the defective Cobalt switches, Ray DeGiorgio, also designed the switches on the latest batch of recalled cars. DeGiorgio was fired after the earlier recall. He could not be reached for comment.

GM has issued 44 recalls this year totaling about 20 million vehicles worldwide, which is more than total annual U.S. vehicle sales. Of the recalls this year, nearly 6.5 million of the vehicles were recalled for ignition switch-related issues, including more than half a million Chevrolet Camaros on Friday.

The automaker raised a recall-related charge for the second quarter to $700 million from $400 million. That takes GM’s total recall-related charges this year to $2 billion.

Despite the rash of recalls this year, GM U.S. sales rose in May to the highest level since August 2008.

GM’s high profile problem this year has catalyzed recalls at other automakers, said David Cole, chairman emeritus of the Center of Automotive Research in Ann Arbor. He described the recent flurry of activity as “recall spring.”

“If it were unique to GM, I would say it is a much more serious problem,” said Cole.

Clarence Ditlow, Executive Director Center for Auto SafetyOf Monday’s recall, said GM could not afford to take a chance on not recalling a car. “Their calculus has totally changed,” he said.

GM said it was aware of eight crashes and six injuries related to the latest recall, but could not say if there were any fatalities.

The automaker on Monday said it would replace or rework ignition keys to eliminate a slot in the end of the key. The slot allows a dangling key ring to slip to one side and pull the ignition key out of run position.

“The use of a key with a hole, rather than a slotted key, addresses the concern of unintended key rotation due to a jarring road event, such as striking a pothole or crossing railroad tracks,” it said.

A spokesman said the ignition switches did not need to be replaced, even though they were “slightly” below the company specification for torque — the force needed to move the switch out of the run position.

The latest recall includes Buick LaCrosse, Chevrolet Impala, Cadillac DeVille and several other models, though only the Impala is currently in production. The cars cover model years 2000 through 2014.

Monday’s recall comes two days before CEO Barra is due to return to Congress to testify about the earlier Cobalt recall.

Barra will be joined by Anton Valukas, chairman of GM’s outside law firm Jenner & Block, who conducted a months-long investigation that detailed deep flaws in GM’s internal decision-making process.

The so-called Valukas report triggered the departures of 15 GM employees, including several high-ranking executives in the legal, engineering and public policy groups, as well as DeGiorgio.

GM said Barra wants to update Congress on the actions the company has taken in response to the switch recall crisis, including fixing the failures outlined in the company’s internal report, announcing plans to establish a victims’ compensation fund and setting up a structure at the company to ensure vehicle safety.

The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which administers vehicle recalls, said Monday that it would “monitor the pace and effectiveness” of the latest GM recall and “take necessary action as warranted.”

(Additional reporting by Bernie Woodall in Detroit and David Lawder in Washington, DC; Editing by Peter Henderson and Bernard Orr)

Link to this story

Silence is something that comes from your heart, not from outside.
Silence doesn’t mean not talking and not doing things; it means
that you are not disturbed inside. If you’re truly silent, then no
matter what situation you find yourself in you can enjoy the silence.

~Thich Nhat Hanh

Doyle Rice, USA TODAY, June 16, 2014

At least one person has died and scores more injured after two tornadoes struck in Nebraska on Monday.

One fatality has been brought into Faith Regional Medical Center in Norfolk and at least 15 people have been brought in with critical injuries, said Jacque Genovese, the hospital’s director of marketing and public information officer for the weather incident. More of the injured were being brought in, Genovese said.

One large tornado had caused “significant damage” near Stanton, Neb., the Weather Channel reported on its Twitter feed. The National Weather Service reported several homes had been destroyed in Pilger, Neb.

@reedtimmerTVN: MAJOR damage here in Pilger, Nebraska need emergency personnel now!

One tweet from PzFeed Top News said the town was “leveled” by a massive tornado.

Brian Davidson, a freelance photojournalist and storm chaser in Pilger, told the Omaha World-Herald that the northern part of the town had been hit by one or two tornadoes. He said every structure he could see for five or six blocks had been damaged. Some injuries may have occurred.

He also saw a car inside a home. “It’s very chaotic here right now.”

Photos and videos from other storm chasers in the region showed at least two tornadoes spinning across farmland in eastern Nebraska.

Much of eastern Nebraska, northern Iowa and southern Minnesota remained under a tornado watch as of late afternoon. The entire region was under a “moderate” risk of severe storms through the rest of the day, the Storm Prediction Center reported, with violent tornadoes possible.

Additional storms will roll through Omaha, Neb., Monday, home of the College World Series, AccuWeather predicted.

Two tornadoes near Wisner, Nebraska. @StormCoker

Link to this story

This post has been reshared 123 times on Google+
View this post on Google+